Man’s preconscious envy of woman’s energy to reproduce and interpret cosmic order underlies male genital cosmetics. Humanity began by seeing the world ordered like a lady’s body. Her management of her physique and her body’s management of her, with its blood and milk flows, birthing and demise, was the basis for the first metaphors to elucidate cosmic forces, made simpler because the moon’s cycles mirrored her life levels and her month-to-month bleeding. The sympathetic magical impact of physique-modifying cosmetics enhanced this cosmic tie. For males to understand this feminine-focused cosmology, required the fitting thoughts-set. Male genital beauty surgery imprinted the cosmic female cycles into man’s thoughts by altering his body and, therefore, his mind and mind, to replicate feminine patterns. Historic mind/thoughts-sets and envy of youth’s virility have maintained the righting rite even after patriarchy tries to inform males they’re Ok. Yet, males do not really feel safe since the persistence of ingrained patterns conflict with male-gendered rituals. Gendered cosmologies at all times trigger divisiveness and neurotic behavior.
Throughout the prudish Victorian era, medical doctors in Britain (and its colonies) and the USA adopted circumcision and different genital mutilations to control sexual behaviour in boys and women, and to stop STDs in adult circumcision care women and men. Circumcision, clitoridectomy and hysterectomy have been prescribed within the false perception that they might prevent or cure masturbation, tuberculosis, psychological sickness, and a tremendous array of different unlikely diseases. Not all British doctors supported these remedies, and female circumcision was banned in 1867, when a woman’s proper to make decisions about her personal physique was recognised. In distinction, male circumcision was continued into the twentieth century by misguided physicians who claimed it was needed in all cases of infantile phimosis and to stop masturbation, most cancers and syphilis.
And now we should weigh threat vs. reward. Are the presumed medical advantages well worth the dangers? There are medical benefits to appendectomy. If we performed routine infant appendectomy, incidents of the life-threatening condition often known as appendicitis could be eradicated. And yet we do not do that, as a result of the required calculation of threat and reward reveals that the dangers are not definitely worth the reward. Abdominal surgical procedure is way too dangerous to make it feasible when not in response to a critical condition.
· Back to the practices of female circumcision and cosmetic plastic surgery: To what extent can or not it’s said that our differential remedy of each of these practices is influenced by a system (of domination and oppression) that operates both to marginalize and ‘pathologize’ the practices of women of different cultures, and to maintain girls within our (Western) tradition subservient to the accepted patriarchal norms of appropriate feminine representation and femininity? To what extent may or not it’s stated that the media-inspired focus on feminine circumcision, and the highly moralistic and condemning tone of the public debate that ensues serve to obliterate and render invisible the plight of all (no matter racial/cultural origins) girls in Canada, and therefore is a practical part of a system that is set to maintain us all quiet (or blind) about the plight of Canadian ladies?