a s͟o͟u͟n͟d͟ ͟s͟o͟u͟l͟ dwells within a s͟o͟u͟n͟d͟ ͟m͟i͟n͟d͟ and a s͟o͟u͟n͟d͟ ͟b͟o͟d͟y͟ ☆ | archive of my thoughts
269 posts
scissor me timbers‼️
beth
it’s the smallest habits. how you spend your mornings. how you talk to yourself. what you read. what you watch. who you share your energy with. who has access to you. that will change your life.
me and my friend like to wear spider suits every thursday to motivate ourselves because thursday is our longest college day
My friends and I used to do this thing where we'd dress up on a theme and go do something totally normal.
We dressed up as pirates and went bowling.
We dressed as vikings and went to the grocery store. The security guard told us we had to move our longship because it was illegally parked.
We dressed as Romans and went to Blockbuster. The staff chanted, "toga! Toga! Toga!" at us.
We dressed up all steampunk and went to the museum. Tourists kept taking our picture.
You survived another week in a very tough world, even though at times it felt like you wouldn’t, and I’m so proud of you.
Monday’s Watch.
All this news about the birth rate falling, am I supposed to be worried? I'm joyous. I hope it falls faster.
can you fucking please look at yourself with the eyes of a lover? fuck
not all angels are in heaven. for example i’m mostly at home
Sarah Perry, The Essence of Peopling
241031 MARK (@ r_e__m___) IG Update
i made a little trinket box years ago and slowly i've been adding small treasures and gifts into it, its been a good few years now and the box can't close anymore.. i wish to have a big box full of things through age ♡
Do you think 27 is still young?
I think 70 is young if you know how to move through the world
I told my students they're allowed to be creative and don't have to be factual when writing about themselves in German because I keep getting questions like "what if I don't have roommates or what if I don't have hobbies" and I'm like guys just make something up! Have fun! I won't fact check you!
So now I am grading homework where a student is claiming to be from North Korea and his hobby is tax fraud
so ummm welcome to my jar:) lemme show you around! theres some holes poked in the top so i can breathe, theres some leaves to munch on, and ive even got a twig! #mytwig
If all your self-worth is tied up in your looks, you are destined for misery.
“it will always be new york or nowhere”
doing shit alone will have people acting like you're the bravest human being who has ever existed. "omg I could never 😖" I'm eating. I'm going to the cinema. it's not a fucking papal conclave.
"oooh we all die one day ooooh someday everyone you love will be gone" okay bitch. i just got a fucking ice cold mountain dew for a dollar from a vending machine and im hanging with my best friend and every second a new living creature is born. what about that? bitch.
Is male circumcision as harmful as female circumcision? I have had multiple discussions about this, but someone said that certain types of FGM are equally or less invasive than MGM
Hi! No, no it is not.
Male circumcision
So, the big question about male circumcisions is if it's ethical or not. A while ago, I would have said, no definitely not, since it's a violation of bodily autonomy. However, someone has since pointed out to me that we do a lot of things to infants (and children) that are technically violations of bodily autonomy.
We consider this morally acceptable because we are providing some intervention that they (the children) are not capable of either requesting or refusing on the basis of it's benefits outweighing the harms. The best example of this, in my opinion, is vaccines. We give children a lot of vaccines because we know that they have (and do) substantially lower the chance of the child getting sick and/or dying from a preventable disease. In this case, the minor violation of bodily autonomy (vaccination of a child) is permitted because waiting until they are able to give their consent would introduce a substantially larger risk of harm.
How does this relate to male circumcision? Given this framework, we could accept male circumcision if (1) there are benefits to the procedure, (2) the benefits outweigh any risk of harm, (3) waiting until the child is able to consent to the procedure is not feasible (i.e., some significant portion of the benefits would be lost).
There is some mixed evidence for these three claims. Evidence in favor includes:
There are a number of reviews [1-3] by the same team that provide support for all three points. In particular this review [3] directly reviews the evidence of "arguments opposing male circumcision", debunking each one in detail. However, the fact that they are all by the same team is less encouraging. The evidence here is substantial, but there's a potential for bias.
That being said, the American Academy of Pediatric [4] also concludes that the "health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks".
This Cochrane Review (essentially the highest quality evidence) [5] found male circumcision substantially reduces acquisition risk of HIV by heterosexual men and that incidence of adverse events is very low.
And this review and meta-analysis [6] found the same reduction for HPV.
Evidence against:
This review [7] suggests the benefits of male circumcision may not apply in North American countries
This article [8] claims the same for developed countries in general
This commentary [9] claims the same, suggesting that "from the perspective of the individual boy, there is no medical justification for performing a circumcision prior to an age that he can ... choose to give or withhold informed consent himself"
That being said these papers have also been challenged by advocates for male circumcision [10] and even opponents [9, 11] recognize that the rates of complications are very low, and the rates of serious complications even lower. In addition to that, complication rate was greater for older children [11], which provides support for the third point I highlighted above (i.e., waiting until they are older may introduce more harms than benefits).
And all of that being said, if the procedure is done, it should absolutely be done with some form of pain relief. Thankfully, it appears that the vast majority are performed in this fashion [11].
In the end, there is strong evidence supporting male circumcision for infants in developing countries. There are research gaps concerning if these benefits apply to developed countries (i.e., little work has examined this population specifically), which indicates a need for such research. That being said, with the extremely low complication rate and moderate evidence of benefits, there also isn't a strong argument against the procedure.
---
Female Genital Mutilation
Comparing this to female genital mutilation (FGM) will highlight just how egregious such equivalencies are.
First, a brief detour into biology. Men and women have various embryological precursors that develop into either male or female sex organs. These are called biological homologues, and they are roughly (although not perfectly) comparable. For example, an embryo has the gonad which, during sex differentiation, develops into the ovary in women and the testicle in men [12].
This framework allows us to make some rough comparisons between male circumcision and FGM. For example, it's likely that the "less invasive" form of FGM you were referred to is type 1A [13]. In this type, only the clitoral hood is removed. Both the clitoral hood and the foreskin develop from the prepuce, as they are homologous structures. Notably, even here, male circumcision and FGM type 1A would still only be homologous if (1) FGM type 1A has a similarly low risk profile as male circumcision and (2) male circumcision actually provides no benefits to the infant.
For the first point, we have little to no data on the complication rate of type 1A FGM, specifically because it is essentially never performed in isolation [14]. This is – almost entirely – a theoretical form of FGM. Despite this, even if it were more common it doesn't necessarily follow that the procedures would have a similar adverse effect profile. In fact, one of the most common arguments against male circumcision involves the numerous nerve endings in the glans (head of the) penis, generally in reference to how the foreskin "protects" the penis head or "preserves sensitization" (neither of which are proven assertions). But while the glans penis and glans clitoris have a similar number of nerve endings in absolute terms, the clitoral head is much smaller and therefore much more densely innervated [15]. As a result, it would be much more likely for the removal of the clitoral hood to result in irritation than the removal of the foreskin.
And for the second point, I've discussed the mixed literature on the topic in developed countries. However, most FGM is performed in developing countries (although certainly not exclusively so) [14], and in this context there is strong evidence of a health benefit to male circumcision and absolutely no health benefit to FGM.
To complete the comparisons between FGM and male circumcision in terms of homologous structures [12, 13]:
Type 1B involves the removal of the clitoris with the prepuce (clitoridectomy). This, anatomically speaking, would be similar to removal of (minimally) the penis head.*
Type 2 involves partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora. This would be roughly comparable to the removal of the penis head, mutilation/cutting/removal of penile raphe (underside of the penis) with or without mutilation/cutting/removal of the scrotum.*
Type 3 is infibulation, or the narrowing of the vaginal orifice with creation of a covering seal by cutting and apposition the labia minora and/or the labia majora, with or without excision of the clitoris. There is no direct comparison for men, as they do not have a vaginal orifice or any similar structure.
Type 4 is all other mutilation/anything that cannot be categorized as above.
*Note: these comparisons aren't perfect due to differences in how the homologous structures are arranged. For example, removal of the penis head would also impact the urethra, whereas removal of the clitoris would not. That being said, these comparisons are far more accurate than between FGM types 1B - 4 and male circumcision.
To further drive home the differences, FGM results in substantial, severe health complications (unlike male circumcision) and has absolutely no known health benefits (possibly unlike male circumcision). These articles [16-21] go into great detail on this; the complications range from: infection, incontinence, infertility, severe and sometimes chronic pain, pregnancy complications, PTSD and post-traumatic symptoms, other psychiatric disorders, greater risk of STDs, and death.
There is no evidence of any benefits.
---
Conclusion
Hopefully, it's clear that male circumcision and female genital mutilation are in no way comparable.
The opponents of male circumcision often suggest that any violation of the bodily autonomy of infants is morally wrong, but this fails to consider the nuanced situation inherent to infant-hood and early childhood. They are physically and mentally unable of consenting to or refusing any medical procedure, which is why we have a – generally recognized – moral caveat to this principle that allows caregivers to act in the best interests of the child, particularly when waiting for the child to grow older before allowing any intervention would increase the risk of harm. (Childhood vaccinations and, really, any other medical procedure done on children, are other examples of this.)
It's possible that future research may indicate that male circumcision is not associated with benefits in developed countries. (This would remove male circumcision from the category of procedures described above.) Even then, however, it would not be comparable to FGM due to the vastly different complication rates.
I hope this helps you!
References under the cut:
Morris, B. J., & Krieger, J. N. (2013). Does male circumcision affect sexual function, sensitivity, or satisfaction?—a systematic review. The journal of sexual medicine, 10(11), 2644-2657.
Morris, B. J., Kennedy, S. E., Wodak, A. D., Mindel, A., Golovsky, D., Schrieber, L., ... & Ziegler, J. B. (2017). Early infant male circumcision: systematic review, risk-benefit analysis, and progress in policy. World journal of clinical pediatrics, 6(1), 89.
Morris, B. J., Moreton, S., & Krieger, J. N. (2019). Critical evaluation of arguments opposing male circumcision: A systematic review. Journal of Evidence‐based Medicine, 12(4), 263-290.
Task Force on Circumcision, Blank, S., Brady, M., Buerk, E., Carlo, W., Diekema, D., ... & Wegner, S. (2012). Male circumcision. Pediatrics, 130(3), e756-e785.
Siegfried, N., Muller, M., Deeks, J. J., & Volmink, J. (2009). Male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men. Cochrane database of systematic reviews, (2).
Shapiro, S. B., Laurie, C., El-Zein, M., & Franco, E. L. (2023). Association between male circumcision and human papillomavirus infection in males and females: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 29(8), 968-978.
Bossio, J. A., Pukall, C. F., & Steele, S. (2014). A review of the current state of the male circumcision literature. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 11(12), 2847-2864.
Frisch, M., & Earp, B. D. (2018). Circumcision of male infants and children as a public health measure in developed countries: a critical assessment of recent evidence. Global public health, 13(5), 626-641.
Deacon, M., & Muir, G. (2023). What is the medical evidence on non-therapeutic child circumcision?. International journal of impotence research, 35(3), 256-263.
Moreton, S., Cox, G., Sheldon, M., Bailis, S. A., Klausner, J. D., & Morris, B. J. (2023). Comments by opponents on the British Medical Association’s guidance on non-therapeutic male circumcision of children seem one-sided and may undermine public health. World Journal of Clinical Pediatrics, 12(5), 244.
Shabanzadeh, D. M., Clausen, S., Maigaard, K., & Fode, M. (2021). Male circumcision complications–a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. Urology, 152, 25-34.
26: The Reproductive System . (n.d.). In Anatomy and Physiology (Boundless) . LibreTexts. https://med.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Anatomy_and_Physiology/Anatomy_and_Physiology_(Boundless)/26%3A_The_Reproductive_System
Abdulcadir, J., Catania, L., Hindin, M. J., Say, L., Petignat, P., & Abdulcadir, O. (2016). Female genital mutilation: a visual reference and learning tool for health care professionals. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 128(5), 958-963.
WHO, U. O. (2008). Eliminating female genital mutilation: An interagency statement. World Health Organization.
Shih, C., Cold, C. J., & Yang, C. C. (2013). Cutaneous corpuscular receptors of the human glans clitoris: descriptive characteristics and comparison with the glans penis. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 10(7), 1783-1789.
Utz-Billing, I., & Kentenich, H. (2008). Female genital mutilation: an injury, physical and mental harm. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology, 29(4), 225-229.
Klein, E., Helzner, E., Shayowitz, M., Kohlhoff, S., & Smith-Norowitz, T. A. (2018). Female genital mutilation: health consequences and complications—a short literature review. Obstetrics and gynecology international, 2018(1), 7365715.
Iavazzo, C., Sardi, T. A., & Gkegkes, I. D. (2013). Female genital mutilation and infections: a systematic review of the clinical evidence. Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 287, 1137-1149.
Berg, R. C., & Underland, V. (2018). Immediate Health Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C).
Sarayloo, K., Roudsari, R. L., & Elhadi, A. (2019). Health consequences of the female genital mutilation: a systematic review. Galen medical journal, 8, e1336.
Reisel, D., & Creighton, S. M. (2015). Long term health consequences of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). Maturitas, 80(1), 48-51.
Please use these terms correctly. Not doing so will deeply harm the people who actually have experienced trauma, gaslighting, triggers, and people who have NPD.
Edit: okay holy hell this blew up overnight. To everyone who is mentioning the censoring - I did not make this graphic, nor did I censor it. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE and it actually kind of ties into my original point. That being said, PLEASE stop reblogging just to say that. I know. Everyone knows. It has been said enough.
deeply obsessed with this
it's so strange how you can detest olives when you're eight years old and suddenly like them at 26. how you can fall in love with someone only for them to turn around one day and reveal themselves as someone completely unrecognisable. how you can want something for so long and finally get it, only for it to not turn out how you thought it would. how you can come to find beauty in your hometown after years resenting it and trying to find yourself in a different city. how you can grow apart from people and find yourself among them again years down the line.
time will change you and how you fit into the world – what you want and how you define yourself, or not. it is so open-ended, always evolving, and I wish I could alleviate the pressure my younger self felt to find herself in this big world with so many possibilities for who she could become. sometimes things just need to take their course. sometimes you just need to take a deep breath and trust that what will happen will happen and there's time to figure things out, because it is not possible to completely control the direction of your life, and nothing – not your state of mind, nor your stage of life – is final.