2006-07-12 03:32:45 · 6 answers · asked by Smegma Stigma 4 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
NO it has nothing to do with empowerment of women. It has just been found medically that circumcision is not as beneficial as it once was. It is easier to keep the area clean when the foreskin is removed. However, with the increased risks of infection, etc. of removing the skin, some families have just opted out of the traditional circumcisions of yesterday.
2006-07-12 03:37:41 · answer #1 · answered by sheristeele 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No, I think it's more about increased availability of clean water.
In the US, though, my guess is that the increasing numbers of boys born without a father involved, and to very young mothers, may well be part of the reason. It has been my experience that circumcised fathers are among the strongest proponents of infant circumcision. (Damn, that's a hard word to type!) And a very young woman is more likely to be swayed by the opinion of the medical "authorities" present during the decision-making process than an older one.
2006-07-12 17:18:31 · answer #2 · answered by LazlaHollyfeld 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is one of the dumbest questions asked on Yahoo! Answers!!
Circumcision was about religious beliefes, and never about women. You are a bit too fascinated with circumcision.
2006-07-12 10:37:03 · answer #3 · answered by man_id_unknown 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It could be the sign that medical costs are so high, that most people don't want to incur any costs, even if they have good medical insurance.
2006-07-12 10:38:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
why are you so obscessed about circumcision. I'm sorry it happened to you, but you need to move on with your life.
2006-07-12 10:37:35 · answer #5 · answered by luveeduvee 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, it is a sign that parents are coming to their senses and stopping this barbaric act.
2006-07-12 10:36:57 · answer #6 · answered by greengunge 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋