insideMAN

Being anti-circumcision does not make you antisemitic

by 12 Comments

Last week a Times journalist admitted that she finds the practice of male circumcision to be “abusive and barbaric”. What gave this revelation an additional charge was the fact that it came in an article about antisemitism, writes Glen Poole. 

Deborah Ross is a secular, cultural Jew who has experienced anti-Semitism herself and says it is in the Jewish character to be “poised for and fearful of anti-Semitic repercussions”. At the same time, she freely admits she didn’t circumcise her son because she finds the practice abusive.

Does this mean Ross is secretly antisemitic herself?

In some people’s eyes if you hold the belief that taking a knife to the foreskin of an eight-day-old baby boy without anaesthetic is barbaric, then you are antisemitic. According to the European Jewish Congress President, Moshe Kantore, for example, those who want to ban unnecessary male circumcision in Europe are “sending out a terrible message to European Jews that our practices, and therefore our very presence on this continent, is treated with disdain.”

Benjamin Albalas, President of the Central Board of Jewish Communities in Greece also believes that trying to end the practice “is a sign of anti-Semitism” as does the columnist Tanya Gold, who wrote in The Guardian last year that a ban on male circumcision would be antisemitic.

The UKIP factor 

I have no doubt that that Gold, Albalas and Kantore genuinely believe that ending unnecessary male circumcision is antisemitic, it is their heartfelt, subjective belief. And if we looked closely we could no doubt find some antisemitic people who are also anti-circumcision. Last year, for example, the Jewish Chronicle reported that people who vote UKIP (a party that has faced continued accusations of racism) are more likely to oppose circumcision and if we dug deep enough we might find some antisemitism behind that statistic.

Taking the nation as a whole, 38% of people support a circumcision ban and 35% are against it, with 27% still undecided. Does this mean that nearly 40% of the British public is antisemitic? Of course not, because being anti-circumcision is not the same as being antisemitic. You can be both, neither or one or the other. You could be an antisemitic Muslim, for example, who stands shoulder to shoulder with his Jewish brothers when it comes to defending the right to perform religious rituals on boys’ genitals.

Are Jews who oppose circumcision antisemitic? 

In reality, there is no one singular Jewish view on the practice of circumcision. Some Jews campaign against it; some will only perform it in medical settings with anaesthetic; some want to continue circumcising boys without anaesthetic in religious settings and some still defend the practice of Metzitzah B’peh where blood is sucked from the circumcised baby’s penis.

Attitudes towards male circumcision sit on a continuum ranging from those who believe anything goes to those who believe in an outright ban, with various compromising (or compromised) positions along the way. Tanya Gold, for example, believes that the practice of Jewish mohels (ritual circumcisers) sucking on baby’s circumcised penises and giving them herpes in the process is “repellent”. She says “no circumcision should be performed without medical qualification; those who disagree, including Jews, should think again”.

The anti-circumcision campaigners that she calls antisemitic would agree with her, but they think that regulation and legislation should go further still. Meanwhile, the orthodox Jews who want to preserve Metzitzah B’peh may think Tanya Gold is antisemitic for wanting to ban their ancient Jewish rituals.

People have a right to think differently 

What some people along the continuum of circumcision beliefs, like Tanya Gold, are essentially saying is that if your belief is more interventionist than mine, then you must be antisemitic. This is an unsustainable position to take. Jewish campaigners against circumcision, like Eran Sadeh who wrote for us last week are not antisemitic, they just dare to think differently and that is a freedom that all good people should fight to preserve.

Anyone with a decent dose of empathy can understand why this is an emotive subject for Jewish communities to confront and everyone with a rational mind should also be able to reach the conclusion that daring to think differently about male circumcision does not make you antisemitic.

Acknowledging that people have a right to hold different beliefs is the antithesis of antisemitism. When we think that other people’s beliefs and actions are causing harm, it is our duty to speak out. If your think that circumcising Jewish boys is harmful to Jewish boys then raise you voice, it isn’t antisemitic to want to protect a Jewish baby from harm.

And the same applies to Muslim boys, American boys, African boys and other boy who is at risk of unnecessary male circumcision. If you think it’s harmful, speak out, it isn’t wrong to have an opinion. And if anyone tries to label you antisemitic, tell them that the Jewish journalist Deborah Ross thinks circumcision is “abusive and barbaric” and she said so in an article all about antisemitism.

—Photo credit: flickr/emmanueldyan

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Also on insideMAN:
  • http://TLCTugger.com Ron Low

    “People have a right to think differently” indeed. Unless it’s an infant male. Then he has no right form his own opinion or be heard before being forcibly cut. Society has failed to protect his freedom of religion.

  • http://NA joe russo

    If circumcision ( which is a euphemism for genital mutilation) hadn’t gotten modern medicine’s stamp of approval for bogus hygiene reasons, this particular religious ritual would have disappeared long ago.

  • Dan Bollinger

    I am an Intactivist. I oppose all forms of forced, genital cutting on boys, girls, and the intersexed. Does that make me anti-Semitic or anti-Muslim? I don’t think so, but many might disagree. I’ve lost track of the number of times I’ve been called anti-Semitic because I wanted to protect baby boys from harm.

    My perspective is different than the authors. Instead of relating to adults, I relate to the infant. No baby boy should have to endure having the end of his penis cut off and then living with a daily reminder of that violation. I want to prevent all boys from circumcision including the ones who happen to be born to one or more parents who practice blood-letting rituals. Now, if I wanted to protect baby boys from harm EXCEPT those born to Jewish parents, THEN you could call me anti-Semitic.

    • Nigel

      By way of an observation the evidence is that historically circumcision was associated with rites of passage to adulthood (as is still the case in some cultures). Of course its all a bit murky (being so long ago) about when this moved to baby boys in the middle east. The obvious thing to do would be to simply mean it has to be considered by males in those traditions when old enough to make a choice.

  • LeeAnn

    There is religious Judaism, familial Judaism, and cultural Judaism. Insofar as any religion is concerned, “a god that requires its followers to mutilate the genitals of their children is unworthy of worship.” To believe otherwise is irrational, perhaps to the point of psychosis.

  • cosmopolite

    I do not agree that ritual circumcision should be outlawed. I am very open to a law that required ritual circumcision to be performed by a doctor using anesthesia. I wish orthodox Jews would abandon MBP immediately.
    That said, it is not anti-semitic to argue in the public square that to impose circumcision on a minor is a very deplorable form of authoritarian parenting. That circumcision can be sexually damaging to both genders. That circumcision reflects a puritanical hostility to masturbation and digital foreplay. That circumcision is hostile to the yin and yang nature of human sexuality, wherein males have a female part, the foreskin, and females have a male part, the clitoris. That there are women who’ve been in intimate relationships with both kinds of men, who say that they clearly prefer intact. That gay men have something to contribute to this discussion. That intact men can face scorn and bigotry in some American circles. Most of all, it is not antisemitic to call for honest research on the consequences of routine and ritual circumcision, including sexual dysfunction. It is not antisemitic for there to exist an ongoing debate about the ethics and theology of ritual circumcision forced on minors.
    A fair number of European and Latin American Jewish families, especially those that identify as liberal or secular, no longer circumcise their sons, but do not wear that fact on their sleeves. This is why I reject accusations that Jews who decline to circumcise “are not true Jews” or “are self-hating”. There is more to Jewishness than narrow obedience to the Torah. Brit milah does not sit well at all with Jewish feminism, and with the Jewish progressive outlook on human sexuality.

  • http://www.genitalautonomy.org John Dalton

    The issue is one of an individual’s right to autonomy. The religious rights of adults do not extend to being able to infringe the rights of the child to avoid unnecessary body modification.

    While acknoledging that there may be some overlap between the set of those who oppose child circumcision and those who are “antisemitic”, the motivation for being opposed to child circumcision is invariably the right to autonomy.

    The right to autonomy accrues to all children irrespective of race, religion or gender.

  • Edward von Roy

    “Neurologically, the most specialized pressure-sensitive cells in the human body are Meissner’s corpuscles for localized light touch and fast touch, Merkel’s disc cells for light pressure and tactile form and texture, Ruffini’s corpuscles for slow sustained pressure, deep skin tension, stretch, flutter and slip, and Pacinian corpuscles for deep touch and detection of rapid external vibrations. They are found only in the tongue, lips, palms, fingertips, nipples, and the clitoris and the crests of the ridged band at the tip of the male foreskin. These remarkable cells process tens of thousands of information impulses per second and can sense texture, stretch, and vibration/movement at the micrometre level. These are the cells that allow blind people to “see” Braille with their fingertips. Cut them off and, male or female, it’s like trying to read Braille with your elbow.” (Gary Harryman)

  • Pingback: How did a women’s equality campaign get turned into a social media movement against male circumcision……..? | insideMAN()

  • RicardoD

    The term “self-hating Jew” is often hurled at Jews who go against the most popular icons in Judaism. Ironically, it is eminently clear that who oppose imposing circumcision on innocent children are among the most loving and caring humans among those of us on Earth at this time. That’s an observation about their overall character and integrity, not just about their position on circumcision. It’s an offensive and hurtful slander for anyone to call such a parent “self-hating Jew.”

  • Name Withheld

    I’m pretty sure Abraham was 99 years old when he was circumcised. A covenant with God can only be done by someone old enough to understand what he is doing. So if it is indeed a religious requirement, an infant cannot participate in religious events because he does not understand what his choices are.

  • Pingback: How did a women’s equality campaign get turned into a social media movement against male circumcision……..? | GlobalNewsCentre.com()