must have ordered the Muslims the same.
Comments on Hygiene is based on historical fact rather than conjuncture.
Medical circumcision in the 19th century and early 20th century
Family circumcision set and trunk, ca. eighteenth century Wooden box covered in cow hide with silver implements: silver trays, clip, pointer, silver flask, spice vessel.
Family circumcision set and trunk, ca. eighteenth century Wooden box covered in cow hide with silver implements: silver trays, clip, pointer, silver flask, spice vessel.
There are several hypotheses to explain why infant circumcision was accepted in the United States about the year 1900. The germ theory of disease elicited an image of the human body as a conveyance for many dangerous germs, making the public "germ phobic" and suspicious of dirt and bodily secretions. Because of its function, the penis became "dirty" by association, and from this premise circumcision was seen as preventative medicine to be practiced universally.[116] In the view of many practitioners at the time, circumcision was a method of treating and preventing masturbation.[116] It was also said to protect against syphilis,[117] phimosis, paraphimosis, balanitis, and "excessive venery" (which was believed to produce paralysis).[116] Gollaher states that physicians advocating circumcision in the late nineteenth century expected public skepticism, and refined their arguments to overcome it.
Infant circumcision was taken up in the United States, Australia and the English-speaking parts of Canada, South Africa and to a lesser extent in the United Kingdom and New Zealand. Although it is difficult to determine historical circumcision rates, one estimate[3] of infant circumcision rates in the United States holds that 30% of newborn American boys were being circumcised in 1900, 55% in 1925, and 72% in 1950.
Circumcision since 1945
In 1949, the United Kingdom's newly-formed National Health Service removed infant circumcision from its list of covered services. Since then, circumcision has been an out-of-pocket cost to parents, and the proportion of newborns circumcised in England and Wales has fallen to less than one percent. In Canada, individual provincial health services began delisting circumcision in the 1980s.
In South Korea, circumcision grew in popularity following the establishment of the United States trusteeship in 1945 and the spread of American influence. More than 90% of South Korean high school boys are now circumcised, but the average age of circumcision is 12 years.
In some South African ethnic groups, circumcision has roots in several belief systems, and is mostly performed on teenage boys.
A study in 1987 found that the prominent reasons for parents choosing circumcision were "concerns about the attitudes of peers and their sons' self concept in the future," rather than medical concerns.[4] A 2005 study speculated that increased recognition of the potential benefits may be responsible for an observed increase in the rate of neonatal circumcision in the USA between 1988 and 2000.[5]
back in 04
