Tradition argument is BS. I find it fascinating that only goy traditions need to be deconstructed by regular ambitious activism. The "decreases HIV in Africa" excuse is sophistry. The christian (and Jewish) black Africans who practice male circ also impose promiscuity restriction; likewise if male has been damaged (at his core after all) and therefore is less likely to have successful encounters that also restricts promiscuity. That restricting of promiscuity is what causes lack of HIV spread. Duh. The cosmetic argument is purely relative. Societies condition their citizens to believe whatever they are conditioned to. Eg European females find male circ weird looking; Japanese females find the white(not red) large penis odd. ------------------ If alien zoologists saw it happen I contend they would say it is established males trying to eliminate competition from up and coming males. A type of male lion kicking young off territory thing. Graham and Kellogg (who started this in 19th century) reason: "to civilize males" (saying "it was to stop masturbation" is 20th century misreading of their writings). Same reason they recommended bland food /no hot peppers: Spanish are rapacious. ...Established males trying to eliminate competition from up and coming males...
Like winston, I have never considered that circumcision could be, on a subconscious level, a way to eliminate male competition. That said, it is the parents of the male that perform this and it's in their best interest to ensure that their blood line continue and not to encumber their male offspring. For this reason I find no validity in this thought.