Infant boy suffers consequences of botched circumcision

A mother in Memphis, Tennessee says her son was mutilated during a circumcision at a local hospital, shortly after his birth. Maggie Rhodes took her complaints to a Memphis investigative news team to warn other parents about her experience. Rhodes also reported that her son’s experience was excruciatingly painful.

“When he was in the room, he was screaming like life and death like, like there wasn’t no tomorrow,” she said. “When she pulled back the cloth, like the thing was like gone.”

Rhodes’ son now requires reconstructive surgery to correct mistakes made during the procedure. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics 1 in 500 circumcisions of newborn boys result in acute complications, and even deaths.

A Voice for Men publisher Paul Elam, an anti-circumcision advocate, did not mince words in his reaction to the story.

“Ms. Rhodes is terribly mistaken,” he said. “Her son was not mutilated by a botched circumcision. Circumcision itself is genital mutilation. It was a senseless act of violence to allow the barbaric and unnecessary procedure in the first place. No parent should be surprised by this kind of outcome.”

  • DragonFire

    I agree entirely….unless there is a medical necessity, leave babies genitals alone!!!

  • Turbo

    When will people wake up that this is mutilation of male genitals. A totally unnecessary procedure at best, a life threatening, life ruining procedure at worst. Barbaric.

  • Paul Johnson

    I can’t get over the cognitive dissonance involved in trying to get someone to come up with a good reason for doing it in the first place.

    WHY are we CUTTING MALES to begin with!?

    1. Women prefer it.
    2. Convenient cleaning.

    Is there ANYTHING ELSE?

    • Rog

      dont forget the loss of 70% of the sensory nerves might make a man more inclined to NOT use a condom later in life(also useful to women wanting a guy to take it off.)

    • Bluedrgn

      Religion?

    • tsubasalovelace

      I never understood the hygene issue. It seems to me that one is a matter of misandry. It’s the supposition that men are too lazy to take daily showers.

      Heh, as far as women preferring it, again it goes back to misandry. I don’t date women, but one of my ex-boyfriends is intact, and since I still live with him (we turned out to be better friends than lovers), I can say that there are plenty of women who enjoy an intact man.

      The only thing I can figure is that the womyn-born-womyn who get up and scream about how unpleasant it is to have sex with an intact man… probably aren’t attracted to men anyway and just need to get a decent girlfriend and shut up about issues of men’s (and trans women’s) health.

  • Robert St. Estephe

    Her is a little information on the most infamous botched circumcision in history, that of David Reimer. It is also one that has enormous implications in terms of the unscientific claims of “gender” ideologues regarding their fallacious theories of “social construction”:

    “Gender” is a Hoax
    http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com/2012/07/gender-is-hoax.html

    • tsubasalovelace

      No, I think that particular case proves that gender is most certainly not a hoax.

      I can say with certainty that if it had been me in David’s place, I would have grown up to be a happy, well-adjusted person with the status of “womyn-born-womyn.” I might have even called myself a feminist *shudder*. However, even though I might have had a happier and fuller life that way, perhaps becoming married in my mid-20s to loving man and adopting children, I’m glad that it was not me. If it had been me, the feminists and Marxists would have been shouting from the rooftops about how it /is/ possible to construct gender socially. This case proves that gender/sex/whatever-you-want-to-call-it /cannot/ be constructed and /is not/ a question of socialization.

      The body part that many people overlook that’s important in these matters is the body part between the ears. Yes, David’s case proves beyond a doubt that one cannot be socialized into a gender that one is not. However, it is more than a bit hasty to conclude that the body part between the legs is the only body part that’s important.

      Now, that being said, I find myself is a peculiar position. Should we waste millions (billions?) of dollars studying trans and cis folk’s brains to pinpoint the origin of that organ’s sex? It would be interesting, certainly, and I’d love to have some test or other I could undergo to stick it to the feminists and also certain MRAs that I /really am/ a woman despite having been born with normal male reproductive anatomy. Yet, at the same time it seems wasteful since it would tie up money and resources that could be better spent on finding cures for much more devastating conditions than merely having a female mind and male reproductive system: Alzheimer’s, seizures, Parkinson’s, PTSD, and major depression are conditions that come to mind.

      The only solution I can find is that we need to simply take somebody’s word for it that when they start estrogen HRT, laser hair removal, and seek to change their reproductive system, that it might just be in everybody’s best interests to accept that person as a woman. Of course, the thing that gives me no end of amusement on this issue is that feminism, certain MRAs, and religion can all be in such perfect agreement that the gender assigned at birth must be privileged over all subsequent evidence uncovered about the true state of a person anatomy, both between the legs and between the ears.

      The important thing is to strive towards gender equality. Feminism is clearly the wrong way forward, since it embraces the gender dichotomy in a very profound and adversarial way—even to the point of lashing out at trans women like me and declaring me to be “really” a rapist, somehow, metaphysically they suppose, even though I am attracted to men and take estrogen. If we lived in a world with true gender equality, it wouldn’t be a big deal when somebody turned out to be some other gender than the one assigned to them at birth or the one their reproductive system would indicate.

  • Andres

    “When he was in the room, he was screaming like life and death like, like there wasn’t no tomorrow,”

    Yeah, no shit, ma’am.
    You know, typing “circumcision” into google and looking at one or two videos of a little boy crying out his lungs would have shown that before you decided to have him cut. But you know, that would have, like, taken two minutes of effort.

    i am so appalled and shocked by parents still getting their sons cut and mutilated without bothering to get the facts that I am at a loss of any further words. There simply is no excuse.

  • Gentlemansmiley

    Sad, in the 21st century, we resort to this kind of barbaric & unnecessary procedure. There is no UP side. Pun intended!

    As for religion, my Jewish wife feels as I do, barbaric. My sons are as God made them, intact!

  • http://kalishivarising.blogspot.com/ Vivica Liqueur

    When I was pregnant and unsure of the sex of my baby I started researching this. I’m glad I did. I was very clear if I had a son I would never do this. It’s horrific. I watched the video of a circumcision and cried my eyes out, I was horrified I even thought this was an option. I had a daughter and I thought, this isn’t seen as an option to girls, why are we doing this to boys?

    The problem is most people do what they are told is the ‘norm’ blindly, without information. Circumcision needs to be illegal. It’s genital mutilation.

    • tsubasalovelace

      The amazing thing is that the American Academy of Pediatrics, who in 2012 told us all about the doom and gloom that would befall us if we didn’t mutilate all boys’ genitals at birth (to protect them from STDs and to protect all the women they were sure to rape from cervical cancer, for all the sick reasons they could have chosen), even 2 years earlier in 2010 attempted to legitimize female genital mutilation. I’m glad that you saw through the bullcrap. I wish there were more people like you. It’s important for us to question authority, especially when that authority is the American Academy of Pediatrics with their inherent conflict of interest. More circumcisions == more $$$ == more follow-up care == more, more $$$.

      It amazes me still that there are those who would call you short-sighted for your choice that ethics outweighs a few percentage points here and there. Thank you again, even though you did not have a son, for evaluating the needs of a potential son and making an ethical choice.

      • http://kalishivarising.blogspot.com/ Vivica Liqueur

        It’s absolutely true that medical facilities would lose out on much money when circumcision is illegal. So warped. It really blows my mind that this barbaric act is still allowed in our society.