|I tread in fear of making an anti-Semitic or anti-Islamic statement here; however, here's my ten cents worth; these observations are not meant to be consistent, and nor are they.|
1. It is interesting that female circ. is seen as barbaric by many when male circ. generally isn't. That said, the female process is indisputably worse and hence is often referred to as female genital mutilation (FGM) because the two are simply not very comparable; for eg, FGM is much more likely to be fatal than male circ., and there are absolutely no medical benefits. (There are closer practices: subincision, the slitting of the penis, would be more comparable in terms of danger, pain and blatant unnecessariness.)
2. It's a fact of cultures generally that less concern is displayed for males. Check the gender and suicide thread for a good example. I think a meme, conscious or otherwise, of 'oh they can handle it, they're boys/men' must be at work here, though is by no means the whole story.
3. Male circumcision has been shown to have medical benefits for men and women (i.e. less cancers, and lower HIV-spread). On that evidence, then there's surely a good case for it, at least if medically carried out rather than done without anaesthetic with a rusy sardine tin in a shed.
4. There are moves to outlaw male circumcision. I don't have time to Google it, but they won't be hard to find.
5. Dunno about the Freudian/Lacanian subtext, the symbolic castration thing. Maybe...
6. I'm str8, but in my limted experience of such matters, I'd rather blow a cut dick.
7. Seeing a Turkish boy immediately post-circ. screaming like fuck at what must have, subjectively, been a sick and shocking assault struck me as one of the most inhumane things I've ever witnessed. (No offense to Turkey or Turks intended; I'm not saying the West isn't full of inhumanities , 'kay?!)
8. Did you hear the one about the Jewish surgeon?
<ducks and runs>