It's remarkable how quickly circumcision rates have been plummeting in the US in the last couple of years. I figure it's people stepping stepping back and actually thinking through the logic and implications of "I want him to look like me," or whatever. Or maybe it's the slim chance that if you cut him, your kid actually will grow up to become a psychologically traumatized intactivist.
Either way, it seems like it's working. And just in case, a San Francisco intactivist and foreskin restoration evangelist has filed a Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition with the city attorney's office, the first step in getting a referendum to ban circumcision, aka Male Genital Mutilation, before the age of 18.
Though the headline misses the proposed legislation's point--i.e., it's not your penis or your sex life that's at issue here--SF Weekly broke the story and has the full, uncut [heh] text of the petition.
San Francisco Circumcision Ban Aims to Spice Up Your Sex Life [sfweekly via dt readers jason, eric, and tim, sheesh]
Yeah, I had my son circumcised when he was born, and ummm.. he was okay with it. At three years old he has yet to swim into the dark abyss which is regret from what his parents did to him at such an early age. Let's hope once he reaches four he still feels the same way.
You shouldn't mess with another person's genitals. End of. I don't think a ban is helpful (won't they just go elsewhere to get it done, just as they will to buy their happy meal with toy?). If Doctors encouraged more people to actually think about the insane pseudo-science behind this practice (and let's face it, science is not what drives fathers to get their sons circumcised) and if insurance companies refused to cover the procedure, it would die a death all on its own.