Around this time of year, Aborigines are conducting ceremonial business in central Australia, including circumcision initiation rites.

News Ltd reported on Monday that three teenagers had turned up at the Tennant Creek hospital, 500km north of Alice Springs, bleeding badly from circumcision procedures that had gone wrong.

They had been circumcised in a makeshift bush camp just out of town. The boys spent three nights in hospital. It can be revealed here that a fourth teenager presented at Tennant Creek hospital on Sunday night, also with lacerations.

That four young men presented in this manner would indicate that the master of ceremonies was incompetent or, as some townsfolk have said, drunk.

It is known that some boys were cut against their will and without parental consent, but that doesn’t mean this is a straightforward police matter. A person can consent to having an ear pierced, getting tattooed, or having surgery.

Furthermore, male circumcision is legal in Australia. It’s just that most doctors refuse to conduct the operation, considering it unnecessary and cruel.

The question of whether circumcision constitutes abuse occupies reams of ethereal internet pages, not that there’s any doubt in the mind of the Jewish lobby. But customary Aboriginal circumcision has not been a public topic.

There is currently a federal intervention afoot in the Northern Territory, with all forms of Aboriginal child abuse supposedly under scrutiny. After News Ltd started asking questions, the hospital covered itself by notifying Family and Community Services.

What action FACs will now take is unknown. If FACs interviews the boys, they won’t learn a thing. This is not white business.

But the potential dangers of bush circumcisions have already exercised white minds. Northern Territory health authorities provide some remote-area clinics with special “ceremonial kits” for Aborigines, which include swabs, sterile cutting implements and post-operation pain relief.

But no pre-operation anaesthetic. Doctors and bush nurses would generally not be permitted to enter the ceremonial ground. The boys are expected to grin (while biting down on a mulga stick) and bear it.

Mastering or overcoming the pain is part of the boy’s passage to manhood. It raises curly questions. If someone is forced to experience pain, are they being abused?

It is a genuine issue for both white and black cultures, but the Northern Territory Government knows that even if it wanted to outlaw the custom (it doesn’t), Aborigines would simply take it further underground. Boys might then be cut with broken glass bottles (not unheard of, which is why the circumcision kits were introduced), kitchen knives or even sharpened rocks.

Aborigines demand the right to continue practising their culture without outside interference, but the circumcision rituals also reveal a clash within black culture.

Many young Aboriginal men want to become initiated. It makes them proud, complete. But some are terrified of going through the ceremonies. That is why one Tennant Creek local told me of seeing a teenager, who had escaped from the ceremonial camp, running through the streets of Tennant Creek, being pursued by a painted-up elder. It is believed the boy was seized and dragged back for the cut.

In most communities, circumcisions are performed on boys aged between nine and 13, but the boys are getting older. That’s because they hide out when the so-called Red Ochre Men come looking for them at this time of year.

The older blokes are determined that their tribe’s boys will be cut. If not this year, they’ll get them the next.

Aboriginal mothers have reported seeking to have their sons circumcised in hospitals, rather than in the unsterile conditions of a makeshift bush camp.

It is understood that sterile scalpels were provided to the elders who circumcised the Tennant Creek boys. The boys were cut while lying in the dirt, most probably while being restrained by up to four men.

I got a fan email from an Aboriginal bloke in Tennant after the first story was published. He wrote: “I wish Paul Toohey would get all his facts right. I know for a fact that no alcohol is involved with the ceremonies. As for the people observing things, you do not even understand what is going on, you bunch of ignorant morons. Yes I had the treatment myself and I am OK. Just wish Paul would get his f*****g facts right. Must not be hard to get a job as a journalist.”

This bloke did not specify whether he was circumcised in this year’s ceremonies, or whether he was even present at them.

Done right, there should be no interference in ritual male circumcision. But it’s no coincidence that four boys emerge from the same ceremony ground, spilling blood. When it’s being done under the influence of alcohol, you’re going to attract unwanted attention.

Those boys will probably now be over their pain, perhaps even feeling proud for having gone through ceremony. In a few years’ time, they can look forward to the final procedure which will take them to the status of a fully initiated man: sub-incision, or whistle-cocking. And maybe even having a front tooth knocked out.

With scars like that, no wonder tribal men don’t bother with bolts through their eyebrows.

46 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Wayne Hutchins says:

      06:45am | 13/01/10

      Sounds barbaric to me but I’m of a different race so I wouldn’t pass any judgment on the ceremony itself but, if being done by some drunk as you describe then some form of punishment would be justified.I think the Aborigines were once quick to resolve issues like this from within but now It seems they have lost their way.  But if you really think about it in this day and age who hasn’t.

    • Margaret Gray says:

      07:35am | 13/01/10

      Why do white city doctors refuse to perform circumcision on newborn boys - citing cultural reasons, yet surgically unqualified and unskilled ‘indigenous elders’ - drunk or otherwise - from the bush can butcher teenage boys without a murmur of disapproval from the medical profession?

    • Wayne Hutchins says:

      07:37am | 13/01/10

      Sick to death of being censored for nothing you guys. Think I might give you lot away as a bad joke….

    • DocBud says:

      08:11am | 13/01/10

      “Done right, there should be no interference in ritual male circumcision.” If the victims clearly don’t want to be circumcised, then they should be proteted. Forcible circumcision is without doubt assault.

      Since we don’t consider them to be adults at this age I don’t believe they should be able to consent. Let people consent when they are considered by the law to be adults.

      In the 21st century, any culture or religion that believes it has the right or that it is necessary to mutilate infants or children, quite frankly, isn’t worth two beans.

    • Louis says:

      09:06am | 13/01/10

      Classic “untouchable” story. If i were to adopt ones culture and preform such procedures I would get my ass kicked by the law due to my skin colour. It’s unfortunate, I feel this will always be an issue as long as it’s a race issue.

      We are passing judgment on ones culture here. However, the always likely inaction by government/police/CPA is a race issue.

    • Paul Colgan

      Paul Colgan says:

      09:08am | 13/01/10

      @Wayne Hutchins - Hi, yes, I removed your suggestion for a punishment for drunkards on the grounds that it was inciteful, borderline racist and devoid of civility. Cheers.

    • Fred says:

      09:40am | 13/01/10

      Liked your article Paul.  Just one thing, we don’t like the word ‘Aborigine’ - and seeing as you live in NT I feel like someone has to have told you this before.  It may be grammatically correct but we’ve grown up avoiding saying it and telling our friends that we don’t like it.

    • Paolo Scimone says:

      10:18am | 13/01/10

      During the sixties and seventies, there was an unsupported health scare in Australia and many Australian boys were circumcised. I personally thought Catholics didn’t do it because Jewish people did, and Protestants probably did because Catholic people didn’t. I still feel religious rivalry plays a major part in this practice.

      I was unaware of this practice existing within the Aboriginal community and though this practice also exists within the Jewish community, I feel that perhaps communities that endorse such practices should observe the way social consciousness has changed over the ages and adherence to customs based on ancient value systems ‘may’ not be appropriate in present society. I believe core Aboriginal spirituality can probably do better than forcing circumcision on unwilling young boys.

      I understand the Aboriginal community’s desire to make their own decisions about their culture and how they wish to preserve it but that doesn’t mean one has to preserve everything they still have, before this land was invaded. The modern Aboriginal is not the same as the one which existed before colonisation. Hopefully the whole world is changing for the better?

    • SLF says:

      10:28am | 13/01/10

      If they were circumcising whales there would be hell to pay!

      Seriously though, there is a huge issue here between two very different cultures and one which has huge implicationd for Australia as a society. At the moment, I think the balance is right as we should not destroy a culture, even if certain aspects are abhorrent to us, but we should mitigate the danger that people suffer as part of their cultural rite of passage. Plus as you have said, male circumcision is legal in Australia, in this instance however it could be practiced more appropriately.

      I think it would se sad if we were to become one single vanilla culture with zero differences and all traditions eroded. To me this leads into a broader debate about what Australian culture is, what multiculturalism is and how as a society we want to mesh together.

    • BT says:

      10:50am | 13/01/10

      @ DocBud I agree with you on most of what you say however it should be recognised that not every culture deems adulthood to begin at the current legal age of 18. Therefore I assume that Indigenous law (@ Fred -is that the correct term?) may deem 9-13 year olds to actually be adults and therefore their perception of what they are doing is not harmful or illegal. Sadly it seems that many Indigenous people have become so marginalised and brutalised by the dominant western culture that they have become quite insular and resist any progressive change whatsoever to their practices. That, coupled with poor education and resources it is likely incidents like this will continue.

    • Margaret Gray says:

      10:53am | 13/01/10

      @Fred

      “...Just one thing, we don’t like the word ‘Aborigine’...”

      Who’s “we”?

      Do ‘you’ prefer the more ubiquitous and general “indigenous”?  A term equally applicable to my locally-born neighbour whose parents are from China.

      What about calling yourself Australian or are separatist labels still important in identifying one’s cultural background?

    • LuckyLady says:

      11:08am | 13/01/10

      Sadly I feel rather ashamed here, I have no idea if this is an indigenous rite of passage or something thats just cropped up. But if it is part of the indigenous culture its up to the elders to police this. We have meddled way to much in indigenous affaires. Our first Aussies deserve to be able to practise their culture, just as we allow the many cultures practise theirs, in a very multi cultural Australia. And I would never be so disrespectful as to judge them.

    • BT says:

      11:12am | 13/01/10

      Perhaps we should all call ourselves Margaret to avoid being “separatist”

    • 6clegs says:

      11:39am | 13/01/10

      Perhaps this issue has more to do with fewer and fewer Elders having been bought up with true Knowledge because of the effects of the Stolen Generations???

      I’ve seen girls under 5 taken by their mothers to have their ears pierced, and the infected, uncared for swollen weeps ears that result. Making dumb decisions has nothing to do with Race/colour, it’s a very human failing.

      Here’s a thought: how about News Ltd employ a few Indigenous journalists to comment/report on Indigenous issues? Then maybe it wouldn’t look like we whites were making judgements. ?

    • CutBoy says:

      12:27pm | 13/01/10

      I think the major point here is being missed.  The diseases that can occur in men with an uncircumcised penis are far greater than in those who are circumcised.  There have been a host of reports in recent years about the rate of HIV being higher in uncircumcised men than in he who are circumcised. The problem being raised in the article should be the failure of medical profession to allow circumcision to continue without hinderance.  if this were the case perhaps the procedure would not be done on a dirt floor with consequent risk of infection.

    • Daremo says:

      12:36pm | 13/01/10

      ‘It is known that some boys were cut against their will and without parental consent, but that doesn’t mean this is a straightforward police matter. A person can consent to having an ear pierced, getting tattooed, or having surgery. ‘

      I’m sorry if I am a little slow, but this paragraph makes no sense.  How are the two sentences related and congurent.  In one you speak of being cut against one’s will and in the other you talk about consent for various matters.  Where is the link?

    • Lee West says:

      01:15pm | 13/01/10

      Maybe Margaret should go look up the meaning of indigenous.

      Unless you are preparing to re-write the history of Australia Margaret, the term indigenous cannot be applied to your locally-born neighbour whose parents are from China.

    • Fred says:

      01:35pm | 13/01/10

      @ Margaret

      I’m not sure what your problem is here - your first paragraph asks what I would prefer to be called and then your second paragraph accuses me of using separatist labels if I call myself anything other than Australian.

      To answer your first question, I do prefer Indigenous Australian - note the capitalisation.  And in response to your second paragraph, it’s not a separatist label, it’s just the name of a race.  I don’t walk around forcing it on people but if somebody asks me where I’m from (because I look different to them) then that’s what I tell them.

    • ab says:

      01:56pm | 13/01/10

      While I agree with your principles, I find it a little offensive that you criticise one culture for their poor practices while not others. Admittedly, I don’t actually know about your opinion on other forms of child abuse in other cultures, and so I don’t direct this really at you, but, judging by many online news comments, there are many Australians who believe it is perfectly alright to hit a child as “discipline”. Forcing them to experience pain? I don’t believe in violations of free will, and agree with you on this.

    • Betelnut says:

      01:56pm | 13/01/10

      @Cutboy.  Actually the risk differential for most infectious diseases is relatively small between C and UC men. 

      In third world environments, WHO and UNAIDS have recommended cirucumcision, in conjunction with sexual education campaigns and a rollout of drug treatments to prevent the spread of STIs and the HIV/AIDS epidemic.  However, this should be seen as being beneficial only in the context of the HIV epidemic in resource poor countries.

      At a population level, in a developed country like Australia with a low HIV prevalence rate, highly educated populace and unfetted access to condoms, the case for widespread medical circumcisions does not stack up and is totally unecessary. In addition,  the misinformation that circumcision = significant protection from disease has been shown to result in an increase in risk taking sexual behaviour in C men which totally outweighs any benefits in decreased HIV transmission.


      Back to the article.  I am unsure why the author has restricted himself to aboriginal circumcision only.  Surely there is a case to be made that all medically unnecessary procedures conducted on children unable to give informed consent constitutes child abuse.  Whether that be ear piercing, circumcision, tattooing or plastic surgury, leave it till they are 18 ( or 16 or 14)

    • Margaret Gray says:

      02:17pm | 13/01/10

      @Fred

      “... it’s just the name of a race…”

      No it’s not.  It’s a geographical descriptor.  At least get the basic facts right.

      Is Muslim a “race”?

      Why do you choose to identify yourself separately from other Australians?

      Is there a greater benefit to using such tribal misnomers?

    • John A Neve says:

      02:39pm | 13/01/10

      Margaret Gray @ 1517hrs,

      In answer ti your question;  Yes,” there is a greater benefit”, it’s as a result of
      positive descrimination. I thought all Australians knew that!!!

    • Fred says:

      02:40pm | 13/01/10

      @ Margaret.  This may be my last reply because from your misunderstanding of what I’m writing I feel like you don’t actually want to have a discussion about this.  As I previously said - ” I don’t walk around forcing it on people but if somebody asks me where I’m from (because I look different to them) then that’s what I tell them.”

      I don’t say “I am not Australian” - If I was overseas and somebody asked where I was from, I would say Australia.  However as I am in Australia and clearly have an Australian accent, when another Australian asks me where I’m from, they obviously aren’t looking for Australia as the answer.

    • DocBud says:

      03:01pm | 13/01/10

      Good comment, Betelnut.

    • Margaret Gray says:

      03:12pm | 13/01/10

      @Fred

      “...However as I am in Australia and clearly have an Australian accent, when another Australian asks me where I’m from, they obviously aren’t looking for Australia as the answer…”

      Why, because of your skin colour?  That’s some chip.

      Who cares that you are black?  I don’t.  I care even less that you are a black Aboriginal.  You are a human being first and foremost.

      You are then either an Australian or you are not…it’s pretty simple; yet you seem so defensive about whether or not a journalist has capitalised the appropriate vowel and labelled you incorrectly.  Why is that such an issue for you?

    • BT says:

      03:28pm | 13/01/10

      @ Margaret, perhaps you should get your facts right.  Aborigine is the name of the Indigenous people of Australia ( a noun) , aboriginal means an indigenous person of any particular country (an adjective).

    • Fred says:

      03:45pm | 13/01/10

      Margaret - in your eyes, is it not possible to be both Australian and Aboriginal?  Or Australian and Italian?  Australian and Scottish?  Do you have a problem with these terms when people say anything more than just Australian?  Because that’s what it sounds like - but I may be mis-reading you.

      Also my skin colour is not black - I have mixed ancestry.  No point in saying what though because you’re just going to get angry at me for not saying I’M AUSTRALIAN.

    • Cheryl says:

      03:55pm | 13/01/10

      I’m all for people keeping their cultural identity alive but to force a procedure on an unwilling child is definitely abuse - it could not possibly be seen as anything else. The PC crowd are too scared to do anything about it for fear of being labelled racist. It would also help matters if the Government is providing sterile kits for circumcision on WILLING children then how about some hospital based training for the elders on the correct technique so it minimises harm? Personally I’d like to see the barbaric practice of circumcision on both males and females banned in all countries with exceptions only for those with a valid medical reason. Religion or race should not give anyone an excuse to abuse children. Have we not progressed from the Dark Ages? The indigenous Australians have a wonderful cultural heritage to uphold - but this particular practice should be stopped.

    • Paul Toohey says:

      05:04pm | 13/01/10

      This story appears in part to have diverged from the topic of circumcision into a grammatical battle. So I may as well join in. For the record, I agree with BT: “Aborigine” is the noun; “Aboriginal” is the adjective. Nonetheless, there is a creep towards using Aborginal as a noun. The West Australian newspaper does it routinely and deliberately, as today when reporting the sad passing of Nyoongar elder Ken Colbung. It reported that Mr Colbung “travelled the world using his influence for the benefit of all Aboriginals”. There is also a growing tendency - pironeered by politcians in press releases - to capitalise “Indigenous Australians”, as The West also did in its report on Mr Colbung. This should be resisted. No extra respect is bestowed by upper-casing the “I”. It’s just further needless mangling of the language. I’ll go away now and take a minute’s silence for Mr Colbung, who indeed was a legend of the west.

    • John A Neve says:

      05:28pm | 13/01/10

      Margaret Gray @ 1612hrs,

      For what it is worth, I am with you. You are either an Australian or your not.
      The terms aboriginal,aborigine and ethnic all have a clear meaning, sadly they have been bastardised and their meaning corrupted. But you are correct.

    • Lisa says:

      06:51pm | 13/01/10

      i disagree with Betelnut that circumcision can produce a higher rate of sexual promiscuity in young men.
      If sexual behaviour is as safe as reaching for a condom, why are we vaccinating young women against cervical cancer? It is ironic that are public hospital system is actively discouraging circumcision whilst we pay millions of dollars to vaccinate girls against some STIs.
      Many eminently qualified Australian medicos are campaigning to have circumcision brought back into fashion within Australia. Personally, and as a Mum of both sexes myself, I feel both men and women deserve to be protected by having a higher percentage of the population circumcised. You can only catch AIDS (among other diseases) once, after all. Circumcision is a simple and well-accepted procedure. Now that it is found to significantly reduce the risk of picking up sexual disease, it should be re-considered as a mainstream procedure - for the good of women as well as the men themselves.
      My own son, aged three, now has to have it done as he is having complications. My husband is most annoyed it was not done when he was young, as now he needs a general anaesthetic.
      And no, non-medicos should not be performing this operation in non-sterile conditions!
      This
      http://sixtyminutes.9msn.com.au/webchats/289966/chat-brian-morris-on-his-opinion-of-circumcision
      is a transcript from Australian tv programme Sixty Minutes, with Dr. Brian Morris, who feels strongly enough about the situation to have established a website,  http://www.circinfo.net/

    • DocBud says:

      12:27am | 14/01/10

      Studies do not show any reduced risk for male to female HIV transmission from circumcision and in Africa there is an indication of an increased risk, which probably has no relevance for Australia due to cultural differences. The risk is supposedly reduced for female to male transmission (but not prevented) and not reduced for male to male transmission.

      There are concerns that the reduced sensitivity of the penis following circumcision makes men reluctant to wear condoms.

      No child should have the procedure unless there is a clear personal medical reason for doing so. When they reach adulthood, if they want to be circumcised rather than wear a condom, then they can make that decision for themselves.

    • Lisa says:

      08:01am | 14/01/10

      doc, the African studies, which were large, and well accepted scientifically, have shown a reduced risk of up to 60 percent. The evidence was so overwhelming that one study was disbanded, with the ‘non-circumcision’ group of men told to go be circumcised.
      Although AIDS is not at the high levels of Africa in Australia, and although the men seem anecdotally to be far more promiscuous, surely a reduced risk of that significance is actually worth considering.
      Other sexual diseases, such as warts which lead to cervical cancer, are also better controlled when men are circumcised. This is all proven science.
      As the doctor told me last week, when I had to front with my distressed son, ideally all boys should be offered circumcision when they are infants, as the skin is paper-thin and only local anaesthetic is required.
      According to hte medical literature I have read recently, the operation is more significant on an older person as the operation is more significant, the healing process is more intrusive and the cosmetic effect is not as good.

    • DocBud says:

      09:22am | 14/01/10

      To reduce risk, you have to be at risk. Australia’s infection rates are so tiny among heterosexual men that it does not make sense to circumcise every male for a risk the overwhelming majority will never face.

      Those who want to go on sexual holidays to Thailand, etc, might want to consider circumcision over a condom but I wouldn’t recommend it. The rate of infection in the Africa trials was about 3.4% uncircumcised and 1.5% circumcised. I can’t imagine anyone who is worried about a 3.4% risk would not also be worried about a 1.5% risk. The risk among sex workers in some countries is probably higher.

      A condom provides almost complete protection against female to male transmission if properly used.

    • Betelnut says:

      10:08am | 14/01/10

      Hi Lisa,

      As I said previously, in Africa with high infection rates, poor edulcation and limited access to condoms, there is a case to be made for circumcision.  However, those conditions do not exist in Australia (except perhaps, ironically, in remote Aboriginal settlements).

      To clarify my previous statement, I did not mean that C men are more promiscuos than NC, merely that in several of the African trials where they subsequently initated wide-spread adult circumcision campaigns, there was an increase in risk taking behviour in newly circumcised induviduals. 

      More relevant to Australia, does decreasing the risk of HIV infection by male circumcision create a perception of increased protection and therby reduce the willingness to utilise condoms?  In which case, does this actually then increase the risk for females in the population?  Just thoughts.

      The comparison with the HPV vaccine is invalid.  Firstly, the protective efficacy of cirumcision in preventing disease transmission is nowhere near that of the two common HPV vaccines (about 99% effective against the HPV serotypes vaccinated against. Note: not this effective against cervical cancer itself).  Secondly, HPV vaccination is non-invasive, in comparison to a non-reversible surgical procedure.  And thirdly, the old cost-benefit analysis.  Cervical cancer is very expensive to treat and is relatively common and fatal.  The vaccine is relatively cheap and it’s preventative value is correpondingly high.  The costs vs benefits of circumcision do not stand up given Australia’s current HIV prevalence rates.

      I have no problem with people wanting to be circumcised (or any other cosmetic treatment for that matter). I just feel that an infant is unable to give informed consent, so should not be circumcised until they can (unless medically necessary).  Imagine the outcry if I took my newborn for a tattoo…

      If people want to be circumcised, drop by the doctors when your 16, fill out some forms and get it done.  I think the value in teaching kids how to have sex responsibly far outweighs any valule in non-reversible genital modification.

    • skoz says:

      10:19am | 14/01/10

      As someone who has lived in the NT desert region for the past three years, I find it interesting to read comments about how this abuse must be stopped, forcibly if need be. Yes I can certainly understand the basis for that, however as someone outside of the culture, we often don’t see the social ramifications for these boys/men. To have an uninvited outsider witness or attempt to intervene in these ceremonies would cause those undergoing the initiation to be “shamed”. The punishment for this can include eviction from their community and family for life. Whilst it’s a black and white issue for those observing from afar or reading about it, for those who live traditional lives it’s very different.

      For those who suggest they are under 18 and therefore children, again you’re talking about people who are still living relatively traditional lives. Adulthood is not defined by “white” laws. This goes in some way to explain the high numbers of young mothers in communities - if you’re a mother, then you’re obviously an adult woman. Similarly with men; in white society if you’re 14, you’re a boy, but if you’re an aboriginal who has been through initiation you’re a man with the associated responsibilities.

    • Jimbo Jones says:

      12:02pm | 14/01/10

      @Margaret - Marge, you’re so over the top baby you make Strother Martin in Cool Hand Luke sound like a kind and gentle fella:

      ‘What we’ve got here is a “failure to communicate”. Some men you just can’t reach. So you get what we had here last week. Which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it. And I don’t like it any more than you men.’

      Sit back and chillax y’all. Chillax!

    • julain thomas says:

      12:36pm | 14/01/10

      funny how the HPV vaccine was never offered to young boys (for free anyhow), all the gays can develop diseases related to these viruses orally (cancers etc) and down below, all the straights can infect women, all the bi’s both

    • marcel campbell remote area nurse says:

      02:02pm | 14/01/10

      It is my understanding that the practice of cirmcision to manhood was only part of the ritual pathway umdertaken willingly by young boys. How that practice sits with todays framented Indigenous culture is open to debate. I have given many Mothers and their youngs sons away from communities at their Mothers request so unwilling boys could be hidden safely by their Mothers. Also, I have experienced young boys sniffing to unconsciousness knowing that they would be medically evactuated to avoid the old falcon round up by disenfranchised men cliniging to a babaric remnant of their culture.

    • Pete Jones says:

      10:39pm | 14/01/10

      Male babies do not remember being circumcised, and therefore do not feel abused.  Parents force lots of things on their children for their good, as they see it.  “abuse” is a relativistic word - depends on the position (and culture) of the beholder.
      Is giving children an injection abuse? Is giving a child detention at school “deprivation of liberty”.  Everybody, including the dominant humanists, has a religious viewpoint on these issues based on their apriori assumptions about life.  “abuse” can depend on the eye of the beholder, and the beliefs in their minds.  Judging others for actions based on their cultural assumptions is a difficult issue.

    • DocBud says:

      01:06am | 15/01/10

      Pete Jones,

      There is no certainty that, over the course of a lifetime, circumsicion will benefit most males in any way whatsoever. It may benefit a very tiny minority. Against this is that it is a non-reversible, invasive procedure whether the baby remembers having it done or not. To physically harm a child for “cultural” reasons is simply barbaric. I have no problem judging any culture or religion that considers it appropriate to violate the person of a child or infant (or non-consenting adult) as inferior and not worthy of respect. Where do you draw the line as to what level of physical harm can be inflicted in the name of culture?

      Detention at school is fine as long as it is punishment for the pupil’s own indiscretions. I have refused to allow my children to be detained in “class detentions” where all pupils are to be punished because the teacher cannot identify the culprit.

    • Matt says:

      12:41pm | 15/01/10

      @Pete Jones Just because someone doesn’t remember the abuse doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. Using your logic it would be ok to sexual abuse babies since they wont remember the abuse. And your idea that abuse is relative is ridiculous . Using your assumption they people should be allowed to murder others in cold bold simply if it is part of their culture.The fact remains that for society to function they require laws. and people that brake those laws should go to jail.

    • LC says:

      02:52pm | 05/01/11

      Lisa, seeing as you are so big on circumcision, perhaps you would like to experience it the way an infant male does (they: you would be accosted in your bed by strangers, stripped naked, wrapped in a straight jacket, and strapped to a procedure table so they could not writhe and squirm in their agony, (sounds a lot like rape, does it not, Lisa?) while some hack in a lab coat slices through the living flesh of your labia and clitoral hood. There would be no pain reduction offered as there is none adequate that’s safe to give to a newborn that quells the pain of circumcision, but there would be a nurse, standing at their head, soothing your howls of agony, and reminding them they are too young to feel the pain, and maybe a give a bottle of sugared water. After you have lived with the ugly scars, the reduced sexual sensitivity, the sense of mutilation, the loss of function (from removing that ‘extra’ skin) and dealt with the attack on the very fundament of your womanhood, then perhaps you will have the credentials to post commentary like that. Now Lisa, why don’t you show to us all what big, brave girl you are, come one now, step up to the procedure table, so I can strap you down. I have sharpened the knives, just for you! Come on Lisa, don’t keep us waiting, you thought circumcision was such a good idea a few minutes ago, now it is time to put your money where your mouth is! Lisa? Lisa? Wait, Lisa, come back! Yeah! Thought so!!!! If would not want it done to you, you aren’t in any position to recommend it for us.

    • LC says:

      02:59pm | 05/01/11

      Julian Thomas, cancer is either genetic or caused by bad lifestyle habits over a long term. Cancer is not a transmittable disease, you cannot catch it off someone who has it like you could catch a cold or the flu. Stop the pseudo-intellectualism, it’s clear to anyone with a basic knowledge of the topic that you haven’t got a clue.

    • Sam says:

      02:44pm | 16/11/11

      The story’s from news ltd, with there history I dout anything in this story is true, getting facts from them is like asking the church about evolution, I expect more than recycled dribble from gossip papers

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @popculturechris: Meanwhile, Gotye holds no.1 for a sixth massive week in the US - "that" song has now sold over 4 million copies there.

ToryShepherd

@loupascale if the survey made you sad, probably skip the comments...

Paul Colgan

@paulwiggins @richardkendall that fountain pens yarn is a great social trend story

Paul Colgan

I like how a tip erodes so only you can use it MT “@paulwiggins: BBC News - Why are fountain pen sales rising? http://t.co/0hk2MRtf

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

We are taught early in life that we should not question authority. We must listen to our parents, our…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter