Sunday, May 1, 2022

It Looks Like @Joseph4GI Is Back


It looks like my account at Twitter has been restored.

I wonder what could have happened?

Could it be Elon Musk is keeping his word?

Those of you who have been following me on here know that Twitter had suspended my account and it looked like I wasn't getting it back.

Well, following the purchase of Twitter by Elon Musk, I decided I would try logging back into my account, and lo and behold, it looks like I'm finally able to start tweeting again.

However, I'm not sure how active I'll be now that my account is back.

It was nice not having to worry about who was tweeting, responding to me, mentioning me etc.

Do I really want to go back to that?

Perhaps for now, I'll just stick to publishing any new posts I create on this blog.

My Thoughts on Elon Musk's Acquisition of Twitter

I'm of two minds regarding the recent series of events surrounding this social media platform.

On the one hand, I'm not sure how I feel about one man having the power to censor or allow information to be published.

That was the problem before, though.

It still IS the problem on platforms such as Facebook, who are owned by a single billionaire, namely Mark Zuckerberg.

Actually, as long as I've been an intactivst, there have always been people trying to label us "anti-Semites," and what we post "hate speech" or "disinformation."

How verifiable fact can be called any of these things is beyond me, and yet, for a while, it seems advocates of male infant circumcision were successful in having me silenced on Twitter.

It is not uncommon to hear from other intactivists that Twitter, Facebook or other social media platforms had suspended their accounts and put them on periodical bans.



It's rather sad, frustrating, scary, all of these things and more at the same time, that the factual information that intactivists have to share can be labeled "hate speech," "disinformation" etc. and banned, blocked, deleted, what have you.

So on the other hand, I'm glad that Twitter is now in the hands of someone that, at least for now, seems to be a champion of free speech.

It is a problem when truth and verifiable fact can be labeled "hate speech" and/or "disinformation" for the sake of censoring it.

It is my hope that Mr. Elon Musk is a man of his word and he protects the free speech of intactivists, although this would be construed as "hate speech" and/or "disinformation" by those who are inconvenienced by it and who would have us silenced.

WHO would be interested in silencing intactivists?

-Those who profit from this procedure performed on millions annually in the United States alone.

-Those who have religious or cultural conviction to protect what they see as an age-old custom.

-Those who have malpractice lawsuits for disseminating medical misinformation and reaping profit from non-medical procedures on healthy, non-consenting individuals to evade.

There are pocketbooks, reputations, religious beliefs and cultural customs to protect.

Arguments stand or fall on their own.

Given a proper hearing, it would be self-evident that arguments against male infant circumcision are robust, and arguments in favor collapse under their own weight.

The only way advocates of male infant circumcision *can* win is to find ways to make sure the conversation doesn't happen, whether it be by crying "hate speech," "disinformation" or by demanding platforms have us banned.

So I am glad that it sounds like we have a champion in Elon Musk.



A lot of people don't like this, but allowing the freedom of speech is a GOOD thing.

It allows us to have important, meaningful conversation, discuss difficult topics such as male infant circumcision, and to present the facts so people can see and verify them for themselves.

It's thanks to freedom of speech that we're allowed to question guidelines put out by male infant circumcision advocates at the CDC and AAP, which we know are deliberately misleading.

It is a logical fallacy to dismiss information when it's not being purported by "the experts" at medical organizations, and/or to prop it up when it is.

It's called "ad verecundiam," also known as "appeal to authority.



Information is either true or false based on its own merit, regardless of who is presenting it, and it is completely possible for even experts at prestigious organizations to be wrong.

It is those interested in suppressing information while maintaining a false narrative who are interested in having the power to decide what is "mis/disinformation" or not.

Intactivists have factual, verifiable information on our side, but what good does it do us if circumcision advocates on Twitter deem it "hate speech" or "disinformation?"

I'm SO glad Mr. Elon Musk decided to buy Twitter.

Only those who fear the truth need fear freedom of speech and eager to wield the power to silence others.

Those who fear actual lies and disinformation need not fret, for the truth shall set us free.

Related Posts:

The State of Affairs for Joseph4gi 
Twitter Censoring Joseph4GI
Circumcision Censorship at Twitter? 
Twitter Bans Award-Winning Circumcision Documentary Filmmaker
Politically Correct Research: When Science, Morals and Political Agendas Collide
OUT OF LINE: AAP Circumcision Policy Statement Formally Rejected

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: 7yo Dies in Bishek, Kyrgyzstan Post-Circumcision


This happened last month, and I've been sitting on it because I've been busy with life and work, but I figured, better late than never.

I can't read the original news article anymore because it's now behind a paywall, but the opening line says it all; A 7-year-old boy died in the Bishkek Children's Hospital, Bishek, Kyrgyzstan on April 2nd this year.

The headline says that an autopsy was not performed.

Outside of the United States, circumcision is performed on boys of varying ages. In Muslim countries, such as Kyrgyzstan, circumcision is performed on children between the ages of 7 and 13.

Some circumcision advocates love to say "death doesn't happen when it's performed on newborns." Jewish advocates love to say "death never happens when performed on the 8th day." Of course, they say this because this is when Jewish boys are customarily circumcised.

None of this is true, however.

Death is a risk of circumcision, and it doesn't really matter at what age the circumcision is performed.

The risks of male infant circumcision include infection, partial or full ablation, hemorrhage and even death.

Quite possibly the most common of all complications is the child bleeding to death because the wound has failed to heal properly, and this will happen to any male, any age, whether it's performed by a ritual circumcisor or doctor.

Please see the long list of links below.

In 2012, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued their policy statement on male infant circumcision, where they state that "the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks," but at the same time, in the same policy statement, they say "the true incidence of complications after newborn circumcision is unknown." The statement concluded that "the benefits are not enough to recommend the procedure," while at the same time, that parents should be the ones to weight the risks and benefits for themselves, the risks of which are, by the AAP's own admission, unknown. In effect, the AAP absolves doctors who perform circumcisions on healthy minors of any responsibility, placing the onus on parents instead.

Because this is cosmetic, non-medical surgery, whether or not these risks are conscionable ought to be considered when performing it on healthy, non-consenting minors.

It is my view that, unless absolutely indicated, the decision of whether or not to circumcise should be left up to the individual in question, when he is of age, and after he has considered all the benefits and risks for himself.

The child was alive and well up until April 2nd last month, and had he not been circumcised he would still be alive.

Death is a risk of circumcision.

Are parents being properly informed about this?

Without medical or clinical indication, can doctors even be performing circumcision on healthy, non-consenting minors, let alone be giving parents any kind of "choice?"

Isn't it medically fraudulent to be profiting from non-medical procedures on healthy, non-consenting individuals?

And if one of said individuals dies, should doctors not be held liable?

Related Posts: 

So Where's the "Sunat Party?"

No World Record for "Circumcision Party"
External Link:
AKIPress:7yo in died in Bihsek after circumcision, autopsy not performed
Further Reading:
CIRCUMCISION DEATH: 13yo Bleeds to Death in the Philippines
AUSTRALIA: One Child Dies, Another Nearly Bleeds to Death Post Circumcision
Another Circumcision Death - Wound Would Not Stop Bleeding

FACEBOOK: Another Baby Fighting For His Life Post Circumcision

MADERA, CA: Another Circumcision Complication

CIRCUMCISION BOTCH: Another Post-Circumcision Hemorrhage Case Surfaces on Facebook

LAW SUIT: Child Loses "Significant Portion" of Penis During Circumcision

CIRCUMCISION BOTCHES: Colombia and Malaysia


FACEBOOK: KENTUCKY - Botched Circumcision Gives Newborn Severe UTI

FACEBOOK: Circumcision Sends Another Child to NICU - This Time in LA

GEORGIA: Circumcision Sends a Baby to the NICU


FACEBOOK NEWS FEED: A Complication and a Death

INTACTIVISTS: Why We Concern Ourselves


CIRCUMCISION: Another Baby Dies

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yet Another One (I Hate Writing These)

Another Circumcision Death Comes to Light

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yes, Another One - This Time in Israel

FACEBOOK: Two Botches and a Death

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Child Dies After Doctor Convinces Ontario Couple to Circumcise


Phony Phimosis: How American Doctors Get Away With Medical Fraud

FACEBOOK: Two More Babies Nearly Succumb to Post Circumcision Hemorrhage

FACEBOOK: Another Circumcision Mishap - Baby Hemorrhaging After Circumcision

What Your Dr. Doesn't Know Could Hurt Your Child

FACEBOOK: Child in NICU After Lung Collapses During Circumcision

EMIRATES: Circumcision Claims Another Life

BabyCenter Keeping US Parents In the Dark About Circumcision

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: Circumcision Claims Another Life

TEXAS: 'Nother Circumcision Botch