Circumcision and Adult Criminality: Actual Research Papers?

[becca74]

I am not looking for debate, opinions and especially *NOT* anecdotal evidence.

Does anyone have link(s) to actual research papers that have been done in (for eg) prisons, to ascertain the criminal population of males which were a) routinely circ'd as newborn infants b) routinely circed in first few months of life c) circed as children d) circed as teenagers e) circed as adults. Differentiation of whether or not the circ was for religious, cosmetic or medical purposes would be great. Also, whether or not the crimes were violent, depending on when/why circ took place.

I've been googling like mad for such info, and so far absolutely nada, except anecdotal. Any circ experts in the know?

:detective: :detective: :detective:

[forbetoel]

I dont think there would be any research, regardless of being pro or anti circ, I don't think anybody would think that it would lead to criminal activity, so that is probally why you cant find the info.

[reAllytee]

I cant see there being any hardcore evidence ....

[Tulp]

I'd be surprised if there was.

[Ana Gram]

I have seen this theory come up a few times, more specifically that men who are circumcised will be more likely to commit rape or sexual assault. However, there doesn't seem to be any evidence to back up this claim.

[Ange&Seth]

I really don't think you'd find anything to support this theory. I'm interested to know why you're after the info?

[MotherNurture]

I think it's an interesting theory but I'm not personally aware of any research that's been done on this. Such research would involve professionals/experts and significant funding. Since male circumcision has been (and in some cases continues to be) very culturally accepted where it's practiced, I just don't think anyone's been motivated enough to take it on.

The idea is that babies are living, breathing, thinking beings that are effected by their environment and early experiences. Their brains are rapidly developing, every experience impacts bonding and perception of the world. It's why we swaddle, snuggle, kiss, talk to, make eye contact and play with our young children. It's why when we hear about a baby being physically hurt/abused, we don't justify it with, "Well, it's no b ig deal; he/she won't remember it." Even though they may not yet be capable of forming conscious memories, we inherently know the connections and associations forming are valuable.

There *is* research that the pain of circumcision sensitizes children to pain and effects how they react to immunization pain later.

I have heard it rumored but haven't seen an actual study that Jews may have lower rates of male alcoholism because a few drops of wine or wine-soaked gauze is used ritually during the bris milah circumcision ceremony at 8 days, generally as the only anestetic. It's been that the early association between severe genital pain and the taste/smell of wine may create an aversion to alcohol.

Also, although 80% of the world's male population is intact, some have argued that the most violent cultures are circumcising cultures. To understand this theory, consider who's at war...

Is it possible that restraining children and cutting their genitals can be a negative experience and that adrenaline and other hormones in addition to pain and in many cases being cold, unwrapped, and the absense of their mother's smell/voice can effect brain development and bonding and create memories the child isn't yet able to attach words to or which is so traumatic fight or flight/disassociation defense mechanisms kick in? Yes, I think it is possible.

Does it lead to criminal behavior? It reminds me of a famous quote by American psychiatrist Karl Menninger: "What's done to children, they will do to society."

I hope this issue is studied more. I think we'd all be in for a surprise. Did you know it wasn't very long ago where doctors were doing open heart surgery on babies after only giving them a medication to paralyze them because they believed they weren't capable of experiencing pain? True story.

Jen

[moonblossom]

MOTHERNATURE, I just want to say how much I admire you...:kiss:

[MotherNurture]

MOTHERNATURE, I just want to say how much I admire you...:kiss:

Awww... :hugs: Thanks. That just makes my day. :)

Jen

[moonblossom]

Well Jen, you say what I want to say, but so much better.

And I'm sure little boys out there, are cheering you on.
:smiliedance:

[becca74]

Thanks everyone. kinda caught between a rock and a hard place. I thought some kind of actual research might have helped me out, but it doesnt seem to exist, so I will remain here, between the rock and the hard place...

that's all I really wanted to share as to *why* I'm asking, as my OP was really only asking for links to research, not anecdotal opinions - as such opinions abound as far as the eye can see, and to be honest, I spent most of my early adult life basing my beliefs on such anecdotes, and then subseqently ended up shooting myself in the foot, so to speak.

[becca74]

Also, although 80% of the world's male population is intact, some have argued that the most violent cultures are circumcising cultures. To understand this theory, consider who's at war...




I know, I would have thought to agree with you on this, but someone a while ago pointed out to me the holocaust: a nation of uncircumcised men committing genocide upon a nation of circumcised men....

Not trying to argue or disagree with you, just trying to point out how both your theory, and the theory I was given above, are *both* purely anecdotal, and therefore totally unreliable.

(as a side issue on that topic, IMO, I think war and violence is more just to do with the umbrella of patriarchy that shadows this world, and has nothing to do with religion or circumcision etc. since war and violence abound around the entire globe - even atheist countries commit atrocities - the old USSR and their pogroms, and China and their dying rooms for baby girls. Yep, I think it is just a male thing - but that is just my *anecdotal* opinion, and it is not based on any research at all....;) )

So I literally am totally open to any evidence that some actual real research could reveal. I am really between that rock and a hard place. :hair:

[Pippi Longstocking]

I'm sorry becca, I don't have any reliable evidence either - it would be an interesting study though. I can only add more subjective opinion regarding the likelihood that early trauma would most likely have a lasting effect on the child.

There are a few studies around exploring cortisol levels and responses to stress and the consequnet impact on the child. While they aren't specific studies covering the data you are after, they may indicate that early trauma will have an impact on the child.
I wonder if anyone has ever done cortisol testing on a baby before, during and after circumcision?

[Pippi Longstocking]

Here we go, I found a study (http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/gunnar/) that tested cortisol levels before, during and after circumcision. The results indicated that
Circumcision produced striking increases in serum cortisol concentrations as can be seen in Fig. 1 (paired t = 15.33, p < 0.001). Increases over pre-circumcision levels (Δ cortisol) ranged from 10 to 19 µg/dl. Thus 30-40 minutes after the beginning of circumcision, concentrations of serum cortisol were 3-4 times greater than concentrations of serum cortisol immediately before circumcision. These results are consistent with results obtained by Talbert et al. (1976), indicating a similar responsiveness of the pituitary-adrenal cortical system to circumcision stress at 2-6 hr and 3-5 days after birth.

This article (http://ceep.crc.uiuc.edu/pubs/katzsym/lowenthal.pdf) helps to understand the effects of excessive cortisol. NOTE: The article is specifically dealing with child abuse. This is not meant to necessarily imply that I believe or disbelieve circumcision is child abuse - I am using this paper because it has a good description of stress, cortisol and the effect this has on the child.

Neurological Effects of Abuse and Neglect
Recent research has provided more information about the neurology and
development of the brain during the first years of life. At birth, the brain
is the most immature organ in the human body and will continue to
develop as a result of nature or genetics and through environmental
experiences. These events can have positive or negative consequences
for healthy development (Terr, 1991). Different areas of the brain are
responsible for specific functions (Terr, 1991). Systems in the frontal
content are responsible for abstract thought. Systems in the limbic area
regulate emotion and the attachment process. Other systems in the brain
stem regulate the heart rate, blood pressure, and states of arousal
(Tauwer, 1989).
In these diverse areas, millions of nerve cells or neurons are connected
to each other by synapses. The synapses are pathways that make up the
wiring of the brain (Newberger, 1997). The wiring allows the various
regions of the brain to communicate with each other. Brain development
after birth consists of a continuous process of wiring the connections
between neurons. New synapses form, and others not used are pruned
or broken away. During the first year of life, a baby can have an amazing
array of 1,000 trillion synapses in her brain. However, by the age of
365
366 Barbara Lowenthal
10 years, the pruning or weeding process occurs
more frequently than the formation of synapses
(Nash, 1997). The child then has about 500 trillion
synapses, approximately the same as an adult.
Neurodevelopment can be disrupted in the young
child in two ways: the first is by a lack of sensory
experiences during the critical process of brain
development. Sensory experiences are necessary for
the optimal organization of the brain (Stermer, 1997).
The other way is through an abnormal activation of
neuron patterns caused by extremely difficult experiences
such as maltreatment and neglect (Perry,
1993). These atypical environmental events can
result in the malfunctioning of the regions of the brain
responsible for the regulation of affect, empathy, and
emotions. Continual abuse and neglect also can cause
a disruption in the attachment process of the infants
with their caregivers and a lack of trust in their
environments (Nash, 1997).
The neurological reasons for the malfunctioning of
the brain can be traced to the initial responses to
threat that human beings exhibit. This reaction is
often called the fight or flight response, which
prepares individuals to defend themselves against
perceived threats. Under the stress of the fight or
flight response, the individual exhibits increases in the
heart rate and in the production of a steroid hormone
called cortisol. High levels of cortisol cause the death
of brain cells and a reduction in the number of
synapses. Studies of adults who have experienced
continuous abuse as children indicate that the prolonged
stress of maltreatment results in a shrinkage
of the regions of the brain that are responsible for
memory, learning, and the regulations of affect and
emotional expression (Newberger, 1997). Other
investigations have shown that the brains of maltreated
children can be 20% to 30% smaller when
compared with their nonmaltreated peers (Perry, 1993).

[becca74]

very interesting, thanks for that Guv'nor - but it seems that it more points to problems with intelligence and emotions, rather than creating some kind of violent male, iykwim. My 'relative' is pointing out to me however, that with approx 33% of Nobel Prize winners being most likely circumcised as infants, it doesnt seem to effect intelligence or emotions....

anecdotal, so totally unreliable, but those on the pro-circ band wagon could theoretically argue that RIC can create Nobel Prize Winners....

so do you get what I mean? I need hard fast evidence, to get my point across to someone. At the moment anecdotes are proving flimsy.

[secondtimearound2]

very interesting, thanks for that Guv'nor - but it seems that it more points to problems with intelligence and emotions, rather than creating some kind of violent male, iykwim. My 'relative' is pointing out to me however, that with approx 33% of Nobel Prize winners being most likely circumcised as infants, it doesnt seem to effect intelligence or emotions....



Sorry but how would circumcision effect intelligence :confused:

Considering a lot of our DH's are circumcised it would be silly to suggest that the circ male was more prone to commit a crime or to be more intelligent!!

IMO It's the upbringing of the child and the company kept i.e if your child hang around with drug users then more then likely your child would start using and that leads to other crimes like burglary.

You can't change the way someone thinks. I would just brush it off. If we all thought the same we would live in a very boring world.

[circangel]

I would have thought the very fact of circumcision might actually promote respect for authority. Not that it is done by an authority but it could actually help to make males conform to the right standing in society because of the fact of the circumcision and the fact they had no choice, and if they do something wrong later then again they would have no choice again but to go to jail. Circumcision might or might not have this effect and if not there would be no effect at all. There seems to be less circumcision now but mre crime. If somebody has been circumcised or not I doubt if that would cause them to be criminal because if they do not like they fact that they are circumcised then they can still choose what they are going to do regarding criminal activity. I do not know really but it might need researching. I would be very interested in the results if it is researched.

[Ana Gram]

I would prefer it if was just kept as a theory to be honest.

Imagine criminal trials with the new excuse of "I did it because I was circumcised."

[talia11]

Well in my experience I have never come across research in this area - I did Criminology and Criminal Justice at Uni, have worked in the law enforcement area for 10 years - never heard of anything like this. Seems a bit like clutching straws - however offenders try to blame their crimes on a variety of ludicrous reasons all the time - so why not on circ as well???

[ShadyCharacter]

I am not looking for debate, opinions and especially *NOT* anecdotal evidence.
I must be a not very bright.... I thought this meant Becca wasn't opening this up for discussion, just asking for research help :confused:

[talia11]

Also, although 80% of the world's male population is intact, some have argued that the most violent cultures are circumcising cultures. To understand this theory, consider who's at war...


I would be interested to read more about that theory - where abouts is that from??

[circangel]

I think what is meant is the act of circumcision to be violent hence why they are the most violent cultures

[PaperTiger]

I need hard fast evidence

Unfortunately Becca, I dont think it is going to be easy to get much hard evidence at all.
Have you had a look at any sociology/criminology websites as opposed to medical ones? If half the medical profession dont believe that infants need analgesia during very painful procedures, despite the fact that they are obviously suffering intensly, I dont believe that to many will subscribe to the belief that there is an assosciation between circumcision and crime. Be good if there were though, maybe then the procedure itself would be consigned to the annuls of history in the same way that the world being flat was.

[becca74]

I must be a not very bright.... I thought this meant Becca wasn't opening this up for discussion, just asking for research help :confused:

that's right...

as I said, one could conjure up the anecdote that circing boys as infants can cause them to one day win a Nobel prize, since a nation that consists of a 3rd of 1% of the world population, which ritually circs their boys at 8 days, has won 33% of the Nobel prizes....

if we only trusted anecdotes, people would trust the above one as a good reason for RIC, does that make sense? I have heard it stated on many anti-circ sites that circ can lead to violence/criminality, but there is no real research/evidence to back it up. (eg of such anecdotes: http://primal-page.com/circum2.htm http://www.eskimo.com/~gburlin/mgm/cin/Circ.Info.Network.94.07.22.txt -ie: one could argue the opposite, saying that the uncircumcised nazis were more violent than the circumcised Jews, so the arguments at those links I just dont buy into. Violence has been rampant throughout history regardless of circumcision - I mean, to the Nth Koreans circumcise their boys? Do the Chinese? I actually dont know tbh)

I think since no such evidence exists, then RIC has no connection to future adult criminality, or reduced intelligence. The only research I've seen seems to imply a connection to reduced penile sensitivity, and maybe reduced alcoholism in Jews (thanks MN) but other than that, it doesnt appear to have a permanent effect on a boys overall character. Just their sexuality?

I will continue my research....:detective: I'm just trying to cut away the strong emotion that lies on both sides and find the inner truth. I'm sure it has to be there somewhere!

[Ana Gram]

Becca, I have often thought a possible study could be looking at the rate of circumcision in convicted criminals. Of course, there are many flaws to the study ;)

[Can I?]

Becca - I'm not sure what you will find, but try getting a hold of a copy of "Parenting for a Peaceful World" by Robin Grille. You might find it not only a fascinating read, but it is extremely well-referenced and I recall there being quite a lot of references to circumcision in it.

It also does a great job of explaining how our current parenting culture came about and how it impacts the nature of our children with violence being its main focus.

[NeilR]

.

The idea is that babies are living, breathing, thinking beings that are effected by their environment and early experiences. Their brains are rapidly developing, every experience impacts bonding and perception of the world. Even though they may not yet be capable of forming conscious memories, we inherently know the connections and associations forming are valuable.

Every experience?? I would like some evidence of that.

There *is* research that the pain of circumcision sensitizes children to pain and effects how they react to immunization pain later.

Link please.


I have heard it rumored but haven't seen an actual study that Jews may have lower rates of male alcoholism because a few drops of wine or wine-soaked gauze is used ritually during the bris milah circumcision ceremony at 8 days, generally as the only anestetic. It's been that the early association between severe genital pain and the taste/smell of wine may create an aversion to alcohol.

As I have discussed this with two Rabbi's let just say that they are not of this opinion and they feel there is likely no difference in alcoholism rates in the religious communities regardless of denomination.

Also, although 80% of the world's male population is intact, some have argued that the most violent cultures are circumcising cultures. To understand this theory, consider who's at war...

Principly the countries at war ATM are America, Britain, Holland, Sri Lanka, the two korea's, sudan, ethopia/eritrea...

Is it possible that restraining children and cutting their genitals can be a negative experience and that adrenaline and other hormones in addition to pain and in many cases being cold, unwrapped, and the absense of their mother's smell/voice can effect brain development and bonding and create memories the child isn't yet able to attach words to or which is so traumatic fight or flight/disassociation defense mechanisms kick in? Yes, I think it is possible.

possible?...any research to back this up. Possible is not likely nor is it proven.

Does it lead to criminal behavior? It reminds me of a famous quote by American psychiatrist Karl Menninger: "What's done to children, they will do to society."

Another famous quote is ""One of the most untruthful things possible, you know, is a collection of facts, because they can be made to appear so many different ways."

but as always a quote out of context is meaningless but is meant to give meaning the writer likes. The context for MN's quote is as follows...."Clinical experience has indicated that where a child has been exposed early in his live to episodes of physical violence, whether he himself is the victim or ... the witness, he will often later demonstrate similar outbursts of uncontrollable rage and violence of his own. Aggression becomes an easy outlet through which the child's frustrations and tensions flow, not just because of a simple matter of learning that can be just as simply unlearned, not just because he is imitating a bad behavior model and can be taught to imitate something more constructive, but because these traumatic experiences have overwhelmed him. His own emotional development is too immature to withstand the crippling inner effects of outer violence. Something happens to the child's character, to his sense of reality, to the development of his controls against impulses that may not later be changed easily but which may lead to reactions that in turn provoke more reactions - one or more of which may be "criminal." Then society reacts against him for what he did, but more for what all of us have done - unpleasantly - to one another. Upon him is laid the iniquity of us all..."

And thus relates to parenting and not circumcision.

I hope this issue is studied more. I think we'd all be in for a surprise. Did you know it wasn't very long ago where doctors were doing open heart surgery on babies after only giving them a medication to paralyze them because they believed they weren't capable of experiencing pain? True story.

link to proof please

Jen



....

[serendipity22]

who are circumcised will be more likely to commit rape or sexual assault.

There are some stats in the book "The Hidden Trauma" by Ron Goldman, which he says suggest that more research could be done.

For example rape is 5 to 10 times more common in the USA than in European countries. The author speculates circ might be a factor and that more research is needed.

Studies trying to find causes of criminality in early life are going to difficult, complex and challenging.

There is one study on early experiences (not circ though) I will see if I can find it.

[stellarella]

"Clinical experience has indicated that where a child has been exposed early in his live to episodes of physical violence, whether he himself is the victim or ... the witness, he will often later demonstrate similar outbursts of uncontrollable rage and violence of his own. Aggression becomes an easy outlet through which the child's frustrations and tensions flow, not just because of a simple matter of learning that can be just as simply unlearned, not just because he is imitating a bad behavior model and can be taught to imitate something more constructive, but because these traumatic experiences have overwhelmed him. His own emotional development is too immature to withstand the crippling inner effects of outer violence. Something happens to the child's character, to his sense of reality, to the development of his controls against impulses that may not later be changed easily but which may lead to reactions that in turn provoke more reactions - one or more of which may be "criminal." Then society reacts against him for what he did, but more for what all of us have done - unpleasantly - to one another. Upon him is laid the iniquity of us all..."

It doesnt say anything specifically about parenting or circumcision.

It says 'physical violence'.

I suppose it comes down to the individual but I would imagine cutting off the foreskin from a baby would be an act of violence. I interpret it to be so and no doubt the baby would too. ;)

[Ana Gram]

There are some stats in the book "The Hidden Trauma" by Ron Goldman, which he says suggest that more research could be done.

For example rape is 5 to 10 times more common in the USA than in European countries. The author speculates circ might be a factor and that more research is needed.

Studies trying to find causes of criminality in early life are going to difficult, complex and challenging.

There is one study on early experiences (not circ though) I will see if I can find it.

The failing I see with this theory is explaining the men who rape who are not circumcised, like the man who raped me. Of course that probably wouldn't fit into the study.

[circangel]

That is bad chellegoth, I just wonder how many other women have had a similar experience. Perhaps it might warrant a seperate thread.

[MotherNurture]

The idea is that babies are living, breathing, thinking beings that are effected by their environment and early experiences. Their brains are rapidly developing, every experience impacts bonding and perception of the world. Even though they may not yet be capable of forming conscious memories, we inherently know the connections and associations forming are valuable.


Every experience?? I would like some evidence of that.

It's an idea, Neil. A theory. Most people will agree that our experiences shape a very large part of who we are from a very young age.

---

There *is* research that the pain of circumcision sensitizes children to pain and effects how they react to immunization pain later.


Link please.

Sure thing: LINK (http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/taddio2/)

---

I have heard it rumored but haven't seen an actual study that Jews may have lower rates of male alcoholism because a few drops of wine or wine-soaked gauze is used ritually during the bris milah circumcision ceremony at 8 days, generally as the only anestetic. It's been that the early association between severe genital pain and the taste/smell of wine may create an aversion to alcohol.


As I have discussed this with two Rabbi's let just say that they are not of this opinion and they feel there is likely no difference in alcoholism rates in the religious communities regardless of denomination.

That's nice. As I said, I have yet to see actual proof one way or another.

---

Also, although 80% of the world's male population is intact, some have argued that the most violent cultures are circumcising cultures. To understand this theory, consider who's at war...


Principly the countries at war ATM are America, Britain, Holland, Sri Lanka, the two korea's, sudan, ethopia/eritrea...

Many would argue that the most violent nations right now are the circumcising U.S. and the circumcising (Jews/Muslims) Middle East.

---

Is it possible that restraining children and cutting their genitals can be a negative experience and that adrenaline and other hormones in addition to pain and in many cases being cold, unwrapped, and the absense of their mother's smell/voice can effect brain development and bonding and create memories the child isn't yet able to attach words to or which is so traumatic fight or flight/disassociation defense mechanisms kick in? Yes, I think it is possible.


possible?...any research to back this up. Possible is not likely nor is it proven.

Yes, Neil, possible. Feasible. We're talking about concepts here, and as I stated I'm not aware of any actual research that's been done on this particular issue and I very much hope it will be studied in the future.

---

Does it lead to criminal behavior? It reminds me of a famous quote by American psychiatrist Karl Menninger: "What's done to children, they will do to society."


Another famous quote is "One of the most untruthful things possible, you know, is a collection of facts, because they can be made to appear so many different ways."

but as always a quote out of context is meaningless but is meant to give meaning the writer likes. The context for MN's quote is as follows...."Clinical experience has indicated that where a child has been exposed early in his live to episodes of physical violence, whether he himself is the victim or ... the witness, he will often later demonstrate similar outbursts of uncontrollable rage and violence of his own. Aggression becomes an easy outlet through which the child's frustrations and tensions flow, not just because of a simple matter of learning that can be just as simply unlearned, not just because he is imitating a bad behavior model and can be taught to imitate something more constructive, but because these traumatic experiences have overwhelmed him. His own emotional development is too immature to withstand the crippling inner effects of outer violence. Something happens to the child's character, to his sense of reality, to the development of his controls against impulses that may not later be changed easily but which may lead to reactions that in turn provoke more reactions - one or more of which may be "criminal." Then society reacts against him for what he did, but more for what all of us have done - unpleasantly - to one another. Upon him is laid the iniquity of us all..."

And thus relates to parenting and not circumcision.

Neil, that was all terribly illuminating, thank you.

Obviously, circumcision is currently a 'parenting choice' since parents currently have-and take advantage of-the freedom to choose it. So, I'd have to argue that genital cutting may indeed be a traumatic act of physical violence inflicted on children at the request of their parents.

For those who have never witnessed a circumcision I suggest watching a video of the procedure online; several are available free. Then, reread the Karl Menninger quote-thoughtfully put into context by Neil-again.

---

I hope this issue is studied more. I think we'd all be in for a surprise. Did you know it wasn't very long ago where doctors were doing open heart surgery on babies after only giving them a medication to paralyze them because they believed they weren't capable of experiencing pain? True story.


link to proof please

Before the late nineteenth century, medical doctors understood that infants feel pain.1 Then, in 1872, Paul Emil Flechsig advanced the idea that infants could not feel pain because "their nerves are not completely myelinated."1 Incredibly, this idea caught on, and all sorts of operations---including open heart surgery---were carried out on infants without anesthesia for many years.1

LINK (http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/)

Reference: Cope DK. Neonatal Pain: The Evolution of an Idea. The American Association of Anesthesiologists Newsletter, September 1998. [link (http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/anders1/)]

Jen

[becca74]

I'm not being helped really - both NeilR and MN, as much as I appreciate your separate ideas, both of you are still only providing anecdotes to my original OP.


In regards to a child experiencing violence and then later being effected, I'll give you a hypothetical scenario: child 'a' experienced RIC and had a peaceful non-violent childhood after that (it happens, anyone heard of Natural Jewish Parenting - same as AP except the only difference is they have RIC). or child 'b' who experiences no Circ, and grows up being beaten on a regular basis till age 16.

it's all anecdotes, as far as I can see.

I cant believe the middle east card is still being used to 'prove' circ leads to violent adults. it is just ONE example of violence in the world.

What about the Roman Empire many centuries ago. Also, the Crusades: Uncirc'd men, en masse, raping and pillaging across the known world. Uncirc'd men killing and dominating circumcised Muslims (and Jews, if memory serves me right).

I dont buy the middle east card that is being played. Men are prone to violence. Full Stop. Circ'd or not Circ'd. History shows this. Despite Culture. It is across the board. This is why feminism exists. Men need to be fixed. Circing or not circing is obviously not going to be a part of the 'fix'.

Unless some actual study crops up that can prove something in either direction....

[reAllytee]

Thats the thing Bec everyone always seems to forget the Crusades for some reason ... Anywhos i havent anything to add to this thread just wanted to say yet again i cant see there being any proven link.

Its a hard place to be in & i hope you can find your answer somehow :hugs:

[xkwzit]

Hi Becca
We have let the thread go off topic a fair way. Sorry. From now on, any off topic posts will be deleted to keep to Becca's OP. But feel free to start new threads to explore any spin off topics.

Cheers

[serendipity22]

Becca,

don't think any studies on circ are done but here are some on early life events.

here is a study on
Obstetric care and proneness of offspring to suicide as adults

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=28715

the basic conclusion is
Minimising pain and discomfort to the infant during birth seems to be of importance in reducing the risk of committing suicide by violent means as an adult.

I would have though circumcision without any painkiller (as often done in the USA even now) would
greatly worsen the experience.

There are studies mentioned
http://www.violence.de/prescott/bulletin/article.html

One compares adult violence in various (mainly American) tribes.

Anyway they are the closest I can come up with.

[becca74]

Becca,

don't think any studies on circ are done but here are some on early life events.

here is a study on
Obstetric care and proneness of offspring to suicide as adults

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=28715

the basic conclusion is
Minimising pain and discomfort to the infant during birth seems to be of importance in reducing the risk of committing suicide by violent means as an adult.

I would have though circumcision without any painkiller (as often done in the USA even now) would
greatly worsen the experience.

There are studies mentioned
http://www.violence.de/prescott/bulletin/article.html

One compares adult violence in various (mainly American) tribes.

Anyway they are the closest I can come up with.

http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/suiciderates/en/
http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/suicideprevent/en/index.html

bf'ing at keyboard, but came up with these (with my clicking finger)

highest male suicide rates are in non-circing countries, but it is interesting to note however, that it doesnt seem that much data is available from some African/Middle Eastern countries where circ is common. Israel, however, has extremely low rates (59th in the WHO chart). Top countries with male suicide rates are (top 30): LITHUANIA RUSSIAN FEDERATION BELARUS LATVIA UKRAINE SLOVENIA HUNGARY KAZAKHSTAN ESTONIA SRI LANKA JAPAN FINLAND CROATIA BELGIUM AUSTRIA REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA SWITZERLAND FRANCE CZECH REPUBLIC POLAND BULGARIA CUBA LUXEMBOURG NEW ZEALAND SLOVAKIA YUGOSLAVIA AUSTRALIA MAURITIUS DENMARK

not sure if some of those in the top 30 circ their sons, but Russia obviously dont, and the other Eastern European countries there (we know this because they made it illegal for Jews to do it).

So far, I think violence later in adult hood can so far not be proven (either to others or to self) in direct relation to RIC. The only research based evidence I can find is about the dulling of the sensitivity of the penis.

Will keep on searching...:detective:

[becca74]

okay....more googling ;)

international homicide rates:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homicide_rate

(scroll down for 2000's)

Top 30 countries with highest homicide rates are (copy and pasted):

Venezuela[22]

South Africa

Colombia[23][24][25][15]

Jamaica

El Salvador

Brazil[26]

Guatemala

Russia

Ecuador

Kazakhstan

Bahamas

Swaziland

Mexico

Mongolia

Paraguay

Suriname

Panama

Argentina

Lithuania

Papua New Guinea

Latvia

Thailand

Zimbabwe

Belarus

Kyrgyzstan

Zambia

Barbados

Ukraine

Seychelles

Uganda

Again, not sure which are circ'ing nations or not, but most murderous cultures appear to be non-circing, as far as I can gather. Also, again, little data from Africa/middle Eastern countries, which of course could change the whole table round.

So, still not 100% clear with those stats, but if anything, it shows that horrendous levels of homicide occur, despite RIC, around the world. Again, I think it is just a testosterone thing, and not a circ thing.

[pegasus]

that's right...

as I said, one could conjure up the anecdote that circing boys as infants can cause them to one day win a Nobel prize, since a nation that consists of a 3rd of 1% of the world population, which ritually circs their boys at 8 days, has won 33% of the Nobel prizes....

if we only trusted anecdotes, people would trust the above one as a good reason for RIC, does that make sense? I have heard it stated on many anti-circ sites that circ can lead to violence/criminality, but there is no real research/evidence to back it up. (eg of such anecdotes: http://primal-page.com/circum2.htm [URL]

But it doesn't make sense for RIC as it would mean that 66% of boys who win Nobel prizes aren't circ'd....

Which would in fact mean it's a reason to keep your son intact

Somehow I don't think there'll be any evidence to back up or rebut your theory, but will be watching this thread with interest. Personally (sorry - know this is anecdotal) I think there's too many outside influences between the time an infant is (or isn't) circ'd to give us any proven facts on figures of men who commit crimes (or women, in fact).

[becca74]

It's a rather huge document, but I intend to check it out, but it is the WHO World Report on Violence and Health http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/world_report/en/FullWRVH.pdf

Doing a quick text search for circumcision, it only brings up female circumcision. I want to try and find a chart about international domestic violence rates - to see if RIC/circ has any connection to domestic violence in later adult life...

ETA:

http://www.endabuse.org/resources/facts/International.pdf

will search some of the leads here too...

[becca74]

But it doesn't make sense for RIC as it would mean that 66% of boys who win Nobel prizes aren't circ'd....

Which would in fact mean it's a reason to keep your son intact

Somehow I don't think there'll be any evidence to back up or rebut your theory, but will be watching this thread with interest. Personally (sorry - know this is anecdotal) I think there's too many outside influences between the time an infant is (or isn't) circ'd to give us any proven facts on figures of men who commit crimes (or women, in fact).

It's more a scale. 0.03% of the world population hold 33% of the Nobel Prizes (The Jews). That's a huge amount of prize winners from such a minute population. If such a small group of people can achieve that, and they practice RIC, the anecdote (and please note, I am not looking for anecdotes, I'm playing devil's advocate) concludes that a culture that practices RIC produces an enormous amount of Nobel Prize winners.

ie, no other culture matches that level of winners within it's population.

This is why I dont trust anecdotes. KWIM?

[pegasus]

Sure - after I posted, I read it again and realised what the stats were saying...

It's interesting isn't it how stats can show a lot of stuff?

So does the paper show that the other 66% of Nobel holders aren't circ'd - it could mean so much about the Jewish faith rather than circumcision. Problem is we'll probably never know - now we need someone to do a paper on that!

Maybe Jews are smarter than people of other religions???? Maybe not?

[becca74]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4465916.stm

I am struggling to find actual tables/graphs about international domestic violence rates, but this is the closest I have come to it.

Again, it is a depressing state of affairs, and it is not higher in cultures practicing RIC. It is despicably high across the board, unfortunately. Just testosterone...and poverty level, it seems. Peru dont circ (?), and they are nearly as high as Ethopia, whom I believe circ?

Off Topic, but if the state of the male species is getting really depressing from reading my research, watch this and have your faith restored: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOv47njeLHQ