Showing posts with label Intact America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Intact America. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 29, 2020

The Future of This Blog

 

Well, it's been nearly a decade since I started this blog.

I've tried to faithfully publish my thoughts by making at least one post monthly for nearly 10 years and now I wonder what the future of this blog will be.

The fight to end the forced genital cutting of healthy, non-consenting minors is far from over, in my home country of the United States, let alone the rest of the world.

However, I do feel that the intactivist movement has made strides.

It had been nearly 15 years since I first started questioning circumcision when I decided to start this blog in 2011, and now in 2020 it has been about 24 years since, and a lot has changed.

When I first started researching the topic of circumcision on the internet in say, 1996, there were few resources on the topic, most of which were, in my view, very pro-circumcision.

Indeed, the first website that ever came up in AltaVista (Do you remember that?) was circlist.

There were, of course, also, a few organizations that opposed male infant circumcision, but I found those much later in my journey.

The topic of male infant circumcision was a lot more taboo.

In parenting forums, the bias was always mostly in favor of circumcision.

If anyone ever questioned it, they were usually shouted down by all the other pro-circ parents.

Nowadays, it's not the same.

Where I would see a parent questioning circumcision be overwhelmed by pro-circ parents, now I see more and more parents speaking out in defense leaving baby boys intact.

I used to be one of those activists who always felt the need to counter pro-circ comments on parenting forums, Facebook and other mediums, and I always felt so alone to be practically the only one speaking out.

Now, when I see nasty comments on the internet mocking anatomically correct male organs, I scroll down and I don't even have to comment; there are now enough aware parents out there speaking out.

Sadly, an increase in the intactivist voice among parents also means that a lot of parenting forums and groups have also taken it upon themselves to silence this conversation.

This is a disservice to parents and their children, because this means that parents aren't making fully informed decisions; you can't make a fully informed decision if factual information is deemed "offensive."

Since I started this blog, new organizations opposing the forced genital cutting of healthy, non-consenting minors have arisen.

IntactAmerica, Intaction, and Genital Autonomy just to name a few.

The information database intactiwiki.org has been established.

The award-winning film American Circumcision was published and was even available on Netflix.

Activist Eric Clopper spoke out in a performance he gave at Harvard University; the university has effectively cancelled him and he is now involved in a defamation lawsuit against them.

Male infant circumcision is now being talked about in the mainstream, and it simply is not the taboo subject it once was.

But while more than ever, there is awareness of what's going on in American hospitals, the practice of male infant genital mutilation continues.

The practice continues because it's a moneymaker and doctors have no real reason to stop, even though, reaping profit from performing non-medical surgery on healthy, non-consenting individuals already constitutes medical fraud.

There is still a need to bang the intactivist pot.

For this reason, I plan on continuing to publish on this blog, although I'm sad to announce that from now on, it won't be as often as I'd like.

The sad truth is that your blogger is becoming more and more busy with life.

He is a father of three wonderful children and he works a job whose hours are increasing to support his family.

All is not lost, however; in a way, the goals of my blog are already being achieved.

As I've stated already, more and more circumcision is less of a taboo subject; there is more awareness and the topic is being discussed more openly.

Though I project my presence on this blog is going to decrease in the coming years, there are already other voices speaking out to replace me.

I'm just too busy with my job and family to keep up with any of the latest developments.

And others are already articulating my thoughts and sentiments more tactfully and eloquently than I ever could.

So with this post, I announce that I'll be stepping down, albeit not completely.

I'll still be around to post from time to time, but not as frequently as I'd like.

Up until now, I had been trying to post at least once a month, but I think that more and more, this is becoming less possible.

I'd like to thank all my readership that has followed me this far.

Do check back here from time to time, as I'll still be posting.

Who knows! Maybe I'll find something to post about every month.

I just can't make any promises.

May male infant genital mutilation disappear from American hospitals, truly, every hospital, and soon.

I pray for intactivism for one day to be obsolete, and relegated to the past, where it belongs.

Saturday, February 29, 2020

The State of Affairs for Joseph4gi






Welp... it's been a month, and I'm still in Twitter jail.

Yes, I've still got my Twitter app on my iPhone, and I still check in from time to time to see if I'm still locked out.

No avail.

(The funny thing is, I keep getting messages from Twitter on my e-mail account, so I’m guessing my account survives somehow, somewhere.)

I was thinking to myself, I've still got this blog.

But then, I was also thinking, is it really necessary anymore?

Don't get me wrong, I want to keep it, I want it to go on until something phenomenal happens, like medical organizations finally having the guts to recognize male infant circumcision for the male infant mutilation that it is, but a lot of things have changed since my creation of this blog.

A lot more people have started speaking out.

A lot more organizations have been created.

Some very notable people have started talking openly about male infant circumcision and foreskin.

Very important films have been made regarding this topic.

Is this blog really necessary?

Do I still need to keep raising awareness?

It seems this issue has gone mainstream and now people are undeniably aware.

I'd like to sit back and do other things, now that this issue is out in the open and people are talking about it.

Twitter may have censored, cancelled me, but they can't censor or cancel all the other users talking about this issue, calling doctors and others out.

It used to be that I was on Twitter, Facebook, parenting forums, you name it, and parents would spew unmitigated bullshit.

I felt I had to be that internet warrior jumping in and posting all the links to all the relevant information so that people become aware of all the myths and lies being purported by male infant genital mutilation advocates.

That was like 10 years ago.

Now, it seems, I go to Facebook, Twitter, forums, YouTube comments etc., I see some mother openly brag about how "I'm going to have my son circumcised and no one is going to stop me," and I immediately start checking the comments, and a number of commenters have already got it.

All the talking points I felt needed to be brought up have already been brought up and some mothers and fathers are talking about how they wish they would have had all this information before.

More parents are coming out as "regret parents," and being commended for having seen the light.

I think we've come to the point where this blog is really no longer necessary.

There are organizations like Intact America, Intaction, Bay Area Intactivists and Bloodstained Men working to spread awareness.

Men are beginning to talk about this issue more through organizations like NORM and Men Do Complain.

Men on YouTube are beginning to talk more openly about being intact. (Examples here and here. Click!)

Organizations meant to give information to parents American doctors will not give them are increasing, including Whole Network, Dr. Momma/Peaceful Parenting, Your Whole Baby, and others.

Films have been made like Cut the Film and award-winning American Circumcision.

Influencers with huge followers, such as Joe Rogan are openly denouncing male infant genital mutilation.

Comedians such as Andrew Schulz are openly addressing American idiocy on intact male organs.

I dunno, I think the time has come for me to sit back, take a break and enjoy the ride.

Since I started this blog, I have made it a point to post in this blog at least once, but now, I think, from 2020, I'm going to start cutting back.

It looks like, I don't need to be as aggressive, as angry anymore.

More and more people are waking up, and how.

Still, if I have an epiphany or find information that needs to be shared, I'll post it on here, so this isn't me abandoning this blog, it's me saying, I think I need a break.

My time off of Twitter has actually given me time to start thinking about other things.

So maybe Twitter kicking me out is somehow a blessing in disguise.

I've actually been intending to write out all my thoughts on circumcision in either a book, or one by one on this blog.

How circumcision began in this country, and why it continues seems absolutely clear to me, you see.

But I can't sit down and think about these things if I'm constantly on Twitter, or if I feel constantly under pressure to come up with a blog post every month.

I'd like to take a hiatus and start compiling, editing, and weaving my thoughts into one work. I was thinking a book, but I'm no author.

This isn't a promise; I'm not an editor or a writer, and I understand writing a book is a huge undertaking.

This is just me expressing a desire that may or may not materialize.

Is this the end of Joseph4gi, the angry intactivist?

Time will tell.

Related Posts:

Twitter Censoring Joseph4GI

Circumcision Censorship at Twitter?

Thursday, November 17, 2016

Intactivists Relieved By Clinton Loss - Will Things Be Better Under Trump?


Of course for intactivists, high on the priority list for candidate eligibility is where they stand regarding circumcision, particularly the forced circumcision of healthy, non-consenting minors.

For a while, it was looking like Bernie Sanders was going to be the democratic nominee. That is until things got hairy in different states in regards to counting people's votes.

Anomalies marred the voting process all over the country, including the sudden change in affiliation or the outright disqualification of some voters in New York, the sudden reduction of polling places in Puerto Rico and Arizona causing long waiting lines and some people not being able to vote in time as a result, the convention mayhem that ensued in Nevada, not to mention the coin tosses that ensued in Iowa, and Hillary Clinton calling victory in California before all the votes could even be counted.

Bernie Sanders was a favorite among intactivists for a few reasons.

For one, though Bernie Sanders is Jewish, he wasn't using his Jewishness on his campaign ticket as Hillary was pushing her vagina; this lead to the hope that perhaps maybe, he doesn't feel as strongly for circumcision as religious Jews tend to do.

Additionally, Bernie was pro-universal health care, which for many intactivists, translated to male infant circumcision being defunded in all 50 states, as universal health care would be expected to pay for only medically necessary treatment and/or procedures, something which male infant circumcision is not.

If the following account is to be believed, Bernie Sanders actually made a statement on the subject of male infant circumcision. The following account was first published on Facebook. I have confirmed the source and the person has allowed me to reproduce it here under the condition of anonymity:
"Hi! I'm a precinct captain for my local Bernie Sanders office. I met him the day our office opened and talked briefly with him. I asked him how he felt about circumcision and he said, "I feel we should be following the lead of more medically advanced nations when it comes to any and all medical procedures." It was said directly to me. There were hundreds of people around. Considering more medically advanced countries do not cut infant boys, I took it as a good thing. He seemed a little taken aback with the question, answered it, and walked off. There was an older guy behind me. He said he was shocked I would ask such a personal question, shook his head, and walked away."
~A friend in the Midwest, Iowa, January 18, 2016

Bernie was a progressive who spoke to the issues of many, and he wasn't looking to further the interest of any one sex, race or religious creed. It was the ideal win-win situation; many intactivists really wanted Bernie Sanders to win.

But after Bernie conceded to Hillary Clinton, the issue of circumcision became very important to intactivists. After all, Bill and Hillary had been actively promoting circumcision in Africa as HIV prevention, and the Clinton Foundation even fronted millions of dollars for the goal of circumcising 28 million men in Africa. (The "science" surrounding this claim is dubious at best, and even if legit, circumcision would fail 40% of the time, so circumcised males and their partners need to be urged to continue to wear condoms.)

Intactivists were split into two camps; the side for which circumcision was issue number one, and the side for which circumcision would have to be put on the back burner because they would rather see Hillary Clinton as president over Donald Trump. Knowing Clinton's background with circumcision, some intactivists decided to vote for Jill Stein, or simply Donald Trump because they didn't want to see a president who was directly involved in the ongoing promotion of circumcision as HIV prevention in Africa rise to power.

It was a tough split. For a lot of intactivists, circumcision was not their sole issue; for some intactivists, preserving women's and LGBT rights, and preventing an unabashedly racist president were issues that were far more important than stopping the promotion of circumcision with pseudo-medical lies. Still others did not want a president who was wedded to the banks and corporations on Wall Street, and who had a history of promoting fracking and who was remaining silent on the ongoing Silent Rock oil pipeline crisis.

Between a president who wants to circumcise Africa, possibly the world, with financial interests in maintaining the status quo, and who seems intent on initiating World War 3 with Iran and/or Russia, and a president who disparages women, minorities and has ties to white supremacist groups, not to mention his inexperience in politics and his reputation as a failed businessman who evaded taxes, it was a really tough call.

Jill Stein had some qualities that made her very attractive to intactivists. For the most part, she echoed Bernie Sanders' progressive views. Like Bernie, she was also Jewish but she didn't wear her religion on her sleeve. The double-whammy was that she also happened to be a woman, who, unlike Hillary, wasn't tying her sex to her presidential campaign.

Something else that made Stein very attractive to intactivists was the allegation that she supposedly endorsed Intact America. The Green Party of New Jersey posted on their Facebook website (last accessed 11/18/2016) that she had given her endorsement back in 2012. A Jewish person taking a stand against the forced genital cutting of all children would be an attractive presidential candidate indeed.

But now it's all over, our next president has been decided, and while some intactivists dread the decision, and are browbeating all of those who didn't vote for Clinton, others are sighing a sigh of relief. At least with Clinton gone, they say, there might be less promotion of circumcision going on in Africa, and children in the US will be a little more safe.

But will the situation improve under Trump?

I'm not sure how many intactivists have been paying attention, but it looks as if Trump may have some incentive to continue promoting circumcision under the guise of medicine

According to Ezra Levant from "The Rebel," all of Donald Trump's children are either married to, or marrying Jewish people. Ivanka is married to Jared Kushner, who is Jewish; she converted to Judaism and actually took a Jewish name. Her kids, Trump's grandchildren would also be Jewish.

Donald Jr. is married to Vanessa Haydon, Eric Trump is married to Lara Yunaska, and Tiffany Trump is dating Ross Mechanic, all of whom are Jewish.

The very Trump Organization has people in high executive positions who are Jewish. Executive Vice Presidents Michael D. Cohen and Jason Greenblatt, along with Chief Financial Officer Alan Weisselberg are all Jewish.

There were Jewish people working within Trump's presidential campaign; his speech writer and opening speaker at many of his rallies, Stephen Miller, his Communications Coordinator, Michael Abboud, his Finance Chair, Steve Mnuchin, are all Jewish.


Now, it's not necessarily the case, that just because a person is Jewish, he or she has religious convictions to defend circumcision. After all, some of the most outspoken people in our movement happen to be Jewish.

But given the fact that Jews who oppose male infant circumcision are a minority, I'd say there's a very good chance that Trump will have plenty of incentive to continue promoting circumcision as medicine in Africa via PEPFAR.

Or, who knows.

Trump may decide PEPFAR is a "yuge" waste of money and an international aid folly the US can do without.

I'm not holding my breath...

Related Posts:
Intactivism: It's Not Just for Gentiles Anymore

10 Years Later, UNAIDS Still Hell Bent on Circumcising Africa


UNITED STATES: Infant Circumcision Fails as STI Prophylaxis

CIRCUMCISION "RESEARCH": Rehashed Findings and Misleading Headlines

MASS CIRCUMCISION CAMPAIGNS: The Emasculation and Harassment of Africa

Saturday, June 8, 2013

Intactivism Isn't Making Anyone Rich



There is no money in trying to convince people to do nothing.

It'd be nice if I could leave the job I do every day and live off of trying to convince people that cutting children is wrong.

The sad reality is that while circumcision promoters get cuts (pun absolutely intended) in the form of grants, foreign aid, and getting paid for performing circumcision itself, intactivists have to sacrifice a lot of their time and money to get our message across.

Circumcising a child pays; allowing him to go home whole does not.

Yet I have read here and there, on Facebook, on parenting forums etc., accusations to the effect that intactivists are being "funded by millionaires."

I have never heard of a more ignorant straw-man, ad-hominem accusation.

While intactivists take time out of their busy schedule, not to mention precious time they could be spending with their family and loved ones, not to mention time they could be spending for themselves (e.g. going to school, improving their skills, another job, etc.), there are circumcision promoters whose sole source of income is the promotion of circumcision, if not performing circumcision itself.

The ignorant accusation that "intactivists are being funded by millionaires" stems from the fact that at one point, an intactivist organization, Intact America, got a kick-start grant of a million dollars from a single donor.



While this is irrefutable fact, it's a stretch to say that we're being "funded by millionaires."

Intact America is only ONE organization who got paid one million dollars, one time, by one donor, but that was a long time ago, and that money is gone now. No other intactivist organization has gotten a donation anywhere close to that amount. Intact America now survives on donations it can muster from willing intactivists.

But while circumcision advocates point their fingers and accuse intactivists of being involved in a money-making scam, they either seem oblivious to what's happening in their own camp, or they're deliberately trying to draw attention away from it.

Yes, at one point, Intact America got a million dollar grant from a generous donor.

But how much money do circumcision promoters get?

How much money are circumcision "researchers" like Maria Wawer, Ronald Gray, Robert Bailey, Daniel Halperin, etc., etc., getting for their work in the way of grants and scholarships?

How much money is PEPFAR handing over to PrePex and other organizations to circumcise 20 million Africans?

"Funded by millionaires?"

It would sure be nice if we could get someone like Bill Gates to donate to us the amount of money he's paying circumcision promoters in Africa.

It'd sure be nice if we could get money from the World Bank, UNAids, WHO, PEPFAR etc. to promote HIV prevention to those who don't want to get circumcised.

It'd sure be nice if the NIH, Johns Hopkins, etc. would give grants to researchers who want to find ways to prevent HIV WITHOUT circumcision.

It'd be nice if intactivists were given money to ready information packages, fly to Africa and educate the people of Africa on STD prevention, hygiene etc.

It'd be nice if we could pay artists to write songs about intactivism and speak out against male genital mutilation at HIV/AIDS conferences.

But we just don't have that kind of money.

Circumcisers get cash for their work. For many, this is their sole occupation.

It's intactivists who have to scrounge around for cash, when and if time and circumstances allow, and only after their own obligations and commitments.

When you look at just how much money is being pumped into circumcision promotion and facilitation, it's kind of ridiculous, not to mention dishonest and insulting, to hear a circumcision advocate try and discredit us by accusing us of being "funded by millionaires."

Ad lazarum, ad hominem and projection all rolled into one.

Related Posts:
PEPFAR To Blow Millions on PrePex


External Links:

The 'Circumcision Song' Hits Airwaves Across Africa Thanks to Bill Gates' Funding

Saturday, October 13, 2012

SILENCING DISSENT: AAP Bans Intact America from Trade Show

 
I had already addressed the AAP silencing dissent following the release of their latest policy statement on circumcision. Letters of criticism that took their latest statement apart were either withdrawn from their website, if not never even published. We know that there are letters that do not appear on the AAP website because a number of human rights activists published them openly. They can be read here.

And now, as if taking down or withholding letters of dissent, weren't enough, the AAP has decided to prohibit Intact America from having a booth inside their trade show happening in New Orleans, even after four straight years of exhibiting.

In contrast, they will host a workshop titled "Pros & Cons of Doing Circumcisions," which is described as follows: "This session aims to explain what one needs to do in order to set up a program to do neonatal circumcisions and how one can become an expert circumciser."  (Here's a screenshot in case the latter gets taken down.)

My only guess is that the AAP is clearly intimidated by Intact America, because they are able to take apart their latest policy statement and call them out on their ulterior motives. The AAP knows their latest policy statement is horrendously flawed, and they are terrified to let Intact America speak on the matter, because they don't want to be confronted with the truth.

The extent to which the AAP is going to silence intactivism shows just how terrified they are of our message, how weak their position actually is, and how inept they are at defending it.

 


How You Can Help
The AAP may have kicked Intact America out of their trade show, but they are not going to stop intactivists from protesting outside the convention center that weekend. You can still help Intact America make an impact in New Orleans by donating to them. Your donation will help Intact America stage a major press conference and demonstration, produce and distribute educational materials to thousands of pediatricians, and place Open Letters in the New Orleans Times Picayune.

Help our voice be heard!

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

2012 AAP Tradeshow Demonstration Planned


I am repeating a post The WHOLE Network made on Facebook.

Looks like the American Academy of Pediatrics has noticed The WHOLE Network's "Wash Your Hands Clean of the AAP" campaign! Click this link to their upcoming national conference and watch the scrolling photos. People writing on themselves with permanent marker... look familiar?

Join The WHOLE Network's online campaign on Facebook here.

Watch the video:
YouTube
Vimeo

View the Facebook photo album here (updated weekly).

Sign Intact America's petition here.

Join thousands of others in commenting on AAP's Facebook page to tell them you do not agree with their new stance on circumcision.

Be a part of the mass intactivist demonstration outside of their national convention in New Orleans next month. Click here for the Facebook event.

Intact America will be there, with signs, handouts, and a press conference on Saturday, October 20. If you haven't already "liked" Intact America on Facebook, PLEASE DO IT NOW. And take action by writing to the AAP and telling them what you think about their new circumcision task force report.