Skip to main content
View expanded cover

Male and Female Circumcision pp 221–240Cite as

Tyranny of the Victims

An Analysis of Circumcision Advocacy

  • Chapter

Abstract

It is a sad reflection on the human condition that some childhood victims of traumatic and violent acts are so deeply affected, psychologically, by them, that they grow up to become victimisers themselves. This is often true of victims of child abuse who grow up to abuse their own children. Similarly, some children who experience the trauma of circumcision grow up to become the very adults who are responsible for its persistence. Under investigation here is neither the neonatally circumcised male who merely seeks justifications for his own circumcised state, nor the anxiety-ridden circumcised father who is so disturbed by his newborn son’s intact penis that he insists that it be surgically altered to “match” his penis. Under discussion here are those neonatally circumcised males who are driven to the extreme position of advocating that all males should be circumcised. This form of compulsion should be of concern to all. As John A. Erickson has asked: What percentage of obstetricians, pediatricians, and urologists, etc., are driven to those professions by a compulsion to circumcise?

Keywords

  • Cervical Cancer
  • Male Circumcision
  • Penile Cancer
  • Intact Male
  • Penile Carcinoma

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Erickson JA. Questions. In Memory of the Sexually Mutiluted Child. 1998. http://www.datasync.com/SexuallyMutilatedChild/qstns.htm

  2. Kim DS, Pang MG. Male Circumcision: A South Korean Perspective. (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Winkelmann RK. The erogenous zones: Their nerve supply and significance. Proceedings of the Staff Meetings at the Mayo Clinic 1959;34(2):39–47.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Winkelmann RK. The cutaneous innervation of human newborn prepuce. Journal of Investigutive Dermutology 1956;26(1):53–67.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bourlond A, Winkelmann RK. [The innervation of the prepuce of the newborn infant]. Archives Belges de Dermutologie et de Syphiligruphie 1965;21(2):139–53.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996;77:291–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ritter TJ, Denniston GC. Say No to Circumcision: 40 Compelling Reasons. Aptos: Hourglass. 1996:ll:1–4, 12:1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  8. One incidence of the propagation of this myth can be found in: Weiss GN, Weiss EB. A perspective on controversies over neonatal circumcision. Clin Pediatr Phila 1994;33:726–30.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Anand KJS, Hickey PR. Pain and its effects in the human neonate and fetus. New England Journal of Medicine 1987;317:1321–6.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Lander J, Brady-Fryer B, Metcalfe JB, Nazarali S, Muttitt S. Comparison of ring block, dorsal penile nerve block, and topical anesthesia for neonatal circumcision: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1997;278:2157–62.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Emde RN, Harmon RJ, Metcalf D, Koenig KL, Wagonfeld S. Stress and neonatal sleep. Psychosom Med 1971;33:491–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Anders TF, Chalemian RJ. The effects of circumcision on sleep-wake states in human neonates. Psychosom Med 1974;36:174–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Taddio A, Goldback M, Ipp M, Stevens B, Koren G. Effect of neonatal circumcision on pain responses during vaccination in boys Lancet 1995;345:291–2.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. Taddio A, Katz J, Ilersich AL, Koren G. Effect of neonatal circumcision on pain response during subsequent routine vaccination. Lancet 1997;349:599–603.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Denniston GC. Response to “Determinants of Decision Making for Circumcision” by 17. Cielsielski-Carlucci, N. Milliken, and NH. Cohen (CQ, Vol 5, No 2). Circumcision: ethical and human rights impact assessment. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 1997;6:89–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Denniston GC. Circumcision and the code of ethics. Humane Health Care International 1996;12(2):78–80.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Frisch M, Friis S, Kjaer SK, Melbye M. Falling incidence of penis cancer in an uncircumcised population (Denmark 1943-90). BMJ 1995;311:1471.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Cendron M, Elder JS, Duckett JW. Perinatal urology. In: Campbell’s Urology. 7th edition. Vol. 3. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company. 1998:2151.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Maiche AG. Epidemiological aspect of cancer of the penis in Fmland. Eur J Cancer Prev 1992;1:153–8.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Cutler SJ, Young JL Jr. Third national cancer survey: incidence data. Bethesda, MD. US Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service. 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schoen EJ. Benefits of newborn circumcision: is Europe ignoring medical evidence? Arch Dis Child 1997;77:258–60.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Weiss GN. Prophylactic neonatal surgery and infectious diseases Pediatr Infect Dis J 1997;16:727–37.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  23. Maden C, Sherman KJ, Beckman AM, Hislop TG, Teh CZ, Ashley RL, Daling JR. History of circumcision, medical conditions, and sexual activity and risk of penile cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:19–24.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  24. Schoen EJ. Benefits of newborn circumcision: is Europe ignoring medical evidence? Arch Dis Child 1997:77:258–60.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Fleiss PM, Hodges F. Neonatal circumcision and penile cancer. BMJ 1996;313:47.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Schoen EJ. Penile cancer in elderly circumcised man [letter]. JFam Pract 1997;45:442–3. [note: Schoen read the report that inspired this letter and send it to the editor of the journal before his paper was published in Archives of Disease in Childhood.]

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. International Agency for Research on Cancer European Network of Cancer Registries. Cancer in the European Union in 1990. Great Britain. http://www.-dep.iarcfr/dataava/eucan90/ukg.htm

  28. Dean AL Jr. Epithelioma of the penis in a Jew who was circumcised in early infancy. Transactions of the American Association of Genito-Urinary Surgeons 1936;29:493–9.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Reitman PH. An unusual case of penile carcinoma. J Urol 1953;69:547–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Marshall VF. Typical Carcinoma of the Penis in a Male Circumcised in Infancy. Cancer 1953;6:1044–5.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  31. Paquin AJ Jr, Pearce JM. Carcinoma of the penis in a man circumcised in infancy. J Urol 1955;74(5):626–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Amelar RD. Carcinoma of penis due to trauma occurring in male patient circumcised at birth. J Urol 1956;75:728–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Ledlie RCB, Smithers DW. Carcinoma of the penis in a man circumcised in infancy. J Urol 1956;76:756–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Kaufman JJ, Sternberg TH. Carcinoma of the penis in a circumcised man. J Urol 1963;90:449–50.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Melmed EP, Pyne JR. Carcinoma of the penis in a Jew circumcised in infancy. Br J Surg 1967;54:729–31.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  36. Girgis AR, Bergman H, Rosenthal H, Solomon L. Unusual penile malignancies in circumcised Jewish men. J Urol 1973;110:696–702.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Leiter E, Lefkovits AM. Circumcision and penile carcinoma. N Y State J Med 1975;75;1520–2.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Wade TR, Kopf AW, Ackerman AB. Bowenoid papulosis of the penis. Cancer 1978;42;1890–1903.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  39. Boczko S, Freed F. Penile carcinoma In circumcised males. N Y State J Med 1979;79:1903–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Onuigbo WIB. Carcinoma of skin of penis. Br J Urol 1985:465–6.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Rogus BJ. Squamous cell carcimoma in a young circumcised man. J Urol 1987;138:861–2.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Loughlin KR. Psoriasis: association with 2 rare cutaneous urological malignancies. J Urol 1997;157:622–3.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  43. Wade TR, Kopf AW, Ackerman AB. Bowenoid papulosis of the penis. Cancer 1978;42;1890–1903.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  44. Malek RS, Goellner JR, Smith Ef, Espy MJ, Cupp MR. Human papillomavirus infection and intraepithelial, in situ, and invasive carcinoma of the penis. Urology 1993;42:159–70.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  45. Cupp MR, Malek RS, Goellner JR, Smith TF, Espey MJ. The detection of human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid in intraepithelial, in situ, verrucous, and invasive carinoma of the penis. J Urol 1995:154:1024–9.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  46. Ross BS, Levine VJ, Dixon C, Ashinoff R. Squamous cell carcinoma of the penis in a circumcised man: a case for dermatology and urology, and review of the literature. Cutis 1998;61:41–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Ladocsi LT, Siebert CF Jr, Rickert RR, Fletcher S. Basal cell carcinoma of the penis. Cutis 1998;61:25–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Tietjen DN, Malek RS. Laser therapy of squamous cell dysplasia and cracinoma of the penis. Urology 1998;52:559–65.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  49. Wiswell TE. Circumcision. Pediatrics 1990;85:888–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Wiswell TE. Circumcision circumspection. N Engl J Med 1997;336:1244–5.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  51. Schoen EJ. The relationship between circumcision and cancer of the penis. CA Cancer J Clin 1991;41:369.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  52. Wiswell TE. Circumcision circumspection. N Engl J Med 1997;3361244–5.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  53. Task force on circumcision. Report of the task force on circumcision. Pediatrics 1989;84:388–91.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Kochen M, McCurdy S. Circumcision and the risk of cancer of the penis: a life-table analysis. Am J Dis Child 1980;134;484–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Cutler SJ, Young JL Jr, eds. Third National Cancer Survey: Incidence Data. National Cancer Institute Monograph 41. Bethesda, Md, US Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service. 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Schoen W. The relationship between circumcision and cancer of the penis. CA Cancer J Clin 1991;41:306–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Wynder EL, Cornfield J, Schrott PD, Doraiswami KR. A study of environmental factors in carcinoma of the cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1954;68:1016–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Ldienfeld AM, Graham S. Validity of determining circumcision status by questionnaire as related to epidemiological studies of cancer of cervix. J Nat Cancer Insr 1958;21:713–20.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Wynder EL, Licklider SD. The question of circumcision. Cancer 1960;13:442–5.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  60. Wynder EL, Mantel N, Licklider SD. Statistical considerations on circumcision and cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1960;79:1026–30.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Jones EG, MacDonald I, Brewslow L. A study of epidemiologica factors in carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1958;761–10.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Stem E, Dixon WJ. Cancer of the cervix: a biometric approach to etiology. Cancer 1961;14:153–60.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  63. Aitken-Swan J, Baird D. Circumcision and cancer of the cervix. Br J Cancer 1965;19:217–27.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Abou-Daoud KT. Epidemiology of carcinoma of the cervix uteri in Lebanese Christians and Moslems. Cancer 1967;20:1706–14.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  65. Stern E, Lachenbruch PA. Circumcision information in a cancer detection center population. J Chronic Dis 1968;21:117–24.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  66. Christopherson WM. The geographic distribution of cervix cancer and its possible implications. J Ir Med Assoc 1968;61:1–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Malhotra SL. A study of carcinoma of uterine cervix with special reference to its causation and prevention. Br J Cancer 1971;25:62–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Terns M, Wilson F, Nelson JH Jr. Relation of circumcision to cancer of the cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1973;117:1056–66.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Russell AE. Posible etiologies of cancer of the cervix other than herpesvirus. Cancer Res 1973;33:1485–90.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Harington JS. Epidemiology and aetiology of cancer of the uterine cervix including the detection of carcinogenic N-nitrosamines in the human vaginal vault. S Afr Med J 1975;49:443–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Persaud V. Geographical pathology of cancer of the uterine cervix. Trop Geogr Med 1977;29:335–45.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Sumithran E. Rarity of cancer of the cervix in the Malaysian Orang Asli despite the presence of known risk factors. Cancer 1977;39:1570–2.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  73. Naik KG. Cervical carcinoma in Zambia. Int Surg 1977;62:110–1.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Megafu U. Cancer of the genital tract among the Ibo women in Nigeria. Cancer 1979;44:1875–8.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  75. Lee JP, Cuello C, Singh K. Review of the epidemiology of cervical cancer in the Pacific Basin. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1982;62:197–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Brinton LA, Reeves WC, Brenes MM, Herrero R, Gaitan E, Tenorio F, de-Britton RC, Garcia M, Rawls WE. The male factor in the etiology of cervical cancer among sexually monogamous women. Int J Cancer 1989;44:199–203.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  77. Wkwell TE. Circumcision circumspection. N Engl J Med 1997;336:1244–5.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  78. Cupp MR, Malek RS, Goellner JR, Smith W, Espy MJ. The detection of human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid in intraepithelial, in situ, verrucous, and invasive carcinoma of the penis. J Urol 1995;154:1024–9.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  79. Virtej P, Matei M, Badea M, Badea I, Popa O. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and HPV infection. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1998;19:179–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Cook LS, Koutsky LA, Holmes KK. Clinical presentation of genital warts among circumcised and uncircumcised heterosexual men attending an urban STD clinic. Genitourin Med 1993;69:262–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Task force on circumcision. Report of the task force on circumcision. Pediatrics 1989;84:388–91.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Schoen EJ. Benefits of newborn circumcision: is Europe ignoring medical evidence? Archives of Disease in Childhood 1997;77:258–60.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Kalcev B. Circumcision and personal hygiene in school boys. Medical Officer 1964;112:171–3.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Øster J. Further fate of the foreskin: incidence of preputial adhesions, phimosis, and smegma among Danish schoolboys. Arch Dis Childh 1968;43:200–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Kalcev B. Circumcision and personal hygiene in school boys Medical Officer 1964;112:171–3.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Kalcev B. Circumcision and personal hygiene in school boys Medical Officer 1964;112:171–3.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Øster J. Further fate of the foreskin: incidence of preputial adhesions, phimosis, and smegma among Danish schoolboys. Arch Dis Childh 1968;43:200–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Øster J. Further fate of the foreskin: incidence of preputial adhesions, phimosis, and smegma among Danish schoolboys. Arch Dir Childh 1968;43:200–3.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  89. Van Howe RS. Variability in penile appearance and penile findings: a prospective study. Br J Urol 1997;80:776–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Schoen EJ. Benefits of newborn circumcision: is Europe ignoring medical evidence? Arch Dis Child 1997;77:258–60.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Williamson ML, Williamson PS. Women’s preferences for penile circumcision in sexual partners. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy 1988;14(2):8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Kaplan GW. Complications of circumcision. UroI Clin North Am 1983;10:543–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Williams N, Kapila L. Complications of circumcision. Br J Surg 1993;80:1231–6.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  94. Cansever G. Psychological effects of circumcision. Br J Med Psychol 1965;38:321–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Richards MPM, Bernal JF, Brackbill Y. Early behavioral differences: gender or circumcision? Dev Psychobiol 1976;9:89–95.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  96. Persad R, Sharma S, McTavish J, Imber C, Mouriquand PD. Clinical presentation and pathophysiology of meatal stenosis following circumcision. Br J Urol 1995;75:91–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Berry CD Jr, Cross RR Jr. Urethral meatal caliber in circumcised and uncircumcised males, Am J Dis Child 1956;92:621.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Stenram A, Malmfors G, Okmian L. Circumcision for phimosis: a follow-up study. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1986;20:89–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Griffiths DM, Atwell JD, Freeman NV. A prospective survey of the indications and morbidity of circumcision in children. Eur Urol 1985;11:184–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Brennemann J. The ulcerated meatus in the circumcised child. Am J Dis Child 1921;21:38–47.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Berry CD Jr, Cross RR Jr. Urethral meatal caliber in circumcised and uncircumcised males. Am J Dis Child 1956;92:621.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Wiswell TE. Circumcision questions. Pediatrics 1994;94:407–8.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Task force on circumcision. Report of the task force on circumcision. Pediatrics 1989;84:388–91.

    Google Scholar 

  104. See the discussion on this point in: Kaplan GW. Circumcision—an overview. Curr Probl Pediatr 1977;7:3–33.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Thompson HC, King LR, Knox E, Korones SB. Report of the ad hoc task force on circumcision. Pediatrics1975;56:610–1.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Kaplan GW. Circumcision—an overview. Curr Probl Pediatr1977;7:13–33.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996;77:291–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Jensen MK. [Surgery for phimosis with Plastibell. A follow-up study]. Ugeskr Laeger 1998;160(26):3920–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Wright JE. The treatment of childhood phimosis with topical steroid. Aust N Z J Surg 1994;64:327–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Marshall RE, Porter FL, Rogers AG, Moore J, Anderson B, Boxennan SB. Circumcision: 11. Effects upon mother-infant interaction. Early Hum Dev1982;7:367–74.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  111. Dixon S, Snyder J, Holve R, Bromberger P. Behavioral effects of circumcision with and without anesthesia. J Dev Behav Pediatr 1984;5:246–50.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  112. Goldman R. Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma. Boston: Vanguard. 1997;124–38,144–8.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Goldman R. Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma. Boston: Vanguard. 1997:120–1.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Feldman HA, Goldstein I, Hatzichristou DG, Krane RJ, McKinlay JB. Impotence and its medical and psychosocial correlates: results of the Massachusetts male aging study. J Urol 1994;151:54–61.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Palmer JM, Link D. Impotence following anesthesia for elective circumcision. JAMA 1979;241:2635–6.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  116. Stinson JM. Impotence and adult circumcision. J. Natl Med Assoc 1973;65:161,179.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Douglass WC. Does circumcision cause sexual numbness for middle-aged men? Second Opinion 1995;5(9):3–5.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996;77:291–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  119. Gallup Polls, 1963,1997.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Prescott J. Body pleasure and the origins of violence. Futurist (April 1975):64–74.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Denniston GC. Circumcision: an iatrogenic epidemic. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Muti1ations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press. 1997:103–9.

    Google Scholar 

  122. Goldman R. Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma. Boston: Vanguard. 1997:156–75.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Enzenauer RW, Powell JM, Wiswell TE, Bass JW. Decreased circumcision rate with videotaped counseling. South Med J 1986;79:717–20.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  124. Dresner ML. Circumcision in infancy. Urology 1995;46:769–70.

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  125. American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Fetus and Newborn. Standards and Recommendation for Hospital Care of Newborn Infants. 5th ed. Evanston, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics 1971:110.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Thompson HC, King LR, Knox E, Korones SB. Report of the ad hoc task force on circumcision. Pediatrics 1975;56:610–1.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Ahmann S. Academy holds fast to position on circumcision. Pediatric News 1986;20(9):3,38–9.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Wiswell TE, Smith FR, Bass JW. Decreased incidence of urinary tract infections in circumcised male infants. Pediatrics 1985;75:901–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  129. Ahmann S. Academy holds fast to position on circumcision. Pediatric News 1986;20(9):3,38–9.

    Google Scholar 

  130. Ahmann S. Academy holds fast to position on circumcision. Pediatric News 1986;20(9):3,38–9.

    Google Scholar 

  131. American Academy of Pediatrics. Work Group on Breastfeeding. Breastfeeding and the use of human milk. Pediatrics 1997;100:1035–9.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  132. Jenkins M. Separated at birth. Men’s Health 1998;13(6):130–5,163. (August 1998).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. George C. Denniston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Washington, Seanle, Washington

    George C. Denniston

  2. Wellcome Unit for the History of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, England

    Frederick Mansfield Hodges

  3. National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers, San Anselmo, California

    Marilyn Fayre Milos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 1999 Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Denniston, G.C. (1999). Tyranny of the Victims. In: Denniston, G.C., Hodges, F.M., Milos, M.F. (eds) Male and Female Circumcision. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-585-39937-9_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-585-39937-9_17

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-306-46131-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-585-39937-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive