Is my son mutilated? Nous sommes le (depuis hier soir jusqu'au coucher du soleil de ce soir

Is my son mutilated?
Google translation of https://milah.fr/nomutil.htm
Letter to an anxious father

Dear Father,
I was surprised to hear you describe your son's circumcision as "mutilation," as my friend, the mohel, told me.
First of all, because you were present at the preparatory visit before the circumcision. Secondly, because before choosing Miss Z, you already knew that she was Jewish and committed to at least a minimum level of Jewish practice—to the extent that she had spoken to you about circumcision when the two of you decided to build a life together. Admittedly, the promises of a Don Juan should always be taken with a grain of salt.
As for the word "mutilation" that you used during that conversation, I assume you attach to it the same symbolic meaning as "castration" or "murder," terms so beloved by our psycho-gurus, who readily apply them to countless peaceful people who have never harmed a fly.
You have undoubtedly been influenced, and your language reflects it, by the abundant literature flooding electronic media about the alleged "evils" of circumcision. One finds far more to make one sick than to nourish serious thought, so distorted, one-sided, and agenda-driven are the testimonies presented.
These self-proclaimed experts write things such as: "Men under hypnosis recalled the details of the operation. They expressed anger, a desire for revenge, and destructive feelings toward those who participated in their mutilation." They are probably the very same "therapists" who once unearthed memories of incest and family rape that had never actually occurred.
They readily admit, moreover, that they do not practice an exact science—which is unfortunate when one claims to proclaim unquestionable truths ex cathedra.
The most curious thing is that those who insist on speaking of "mutilation" now do so in the name of a sexuality measured in square centimeters of foreskin, in the name of physiology and histology interpreted according to preconceived theories, invoking concepts that belong entirely to personal, immeasurable experience—to the realm of the mind in its purest form.
Have you read the letter by Mrs. F., President of the National Association of Maternal and Child Health Physicians http://milah.fr/BMexcis.htm, which explains at length the difference between female genital mutilation (excision), which truly is a mutilation with well-documented consequences for women's health, and circumcision?
Have you noticed that the first major modern study of human sexuality—the Kinsey Report—not once mentions circumcision, any more than the work of Masters and Johnson?
Apparently they regarded circumcised men as no different from anyone else.
Do you really believe that 600 million men (and more) around the world are "sexually mutilated"?
Do you really believe that Spinoza, Freud, Montefiore, the Pereire brothers, Benjamin Disraeli, Mendelsohn, Marx, Trotsky, Rothschild, Herzl, Einstein, Léon Blum, Pierre Mendès France, Raymond Aron, Chagall, Yehudi Menuhin, René Cassin, Serge Gainsbourg—to mention only a few icons of our culture—as well as the male members of the British royal family, various American presidents, and numerous Nobel Prize winners, were men handicapped by their circumcision?
Their achievements would certainly suggest otherwise. You should be proud that your son has joined the ranks of so many distinguished figures despite your objections, even if he resembles you a little less. But would he really seek resemblance in such a place?
Freud (like several others mentioned above) cared so little about this concern for physical resemblance that he did not have his own son circumcised.
Do you really think that over the 3,700 years during which we have practiced Brit Milah, no one would have denounced its supposed "functional mutilation"? Don't you think that intimate experience would have spread the message long before the era of biased testimonials on the Internet?
Do you know that in all the legal cases brought in France in recent years concerning the circumcision of minors, the courts have never characterized circumcision as "mutilation"?
You will notice that I have not brought up the alleged "health benefits of circumcision," because I know that is not the issue at hand. At most, they are an added bonus, one that does not interest you.
You are left, then, with the argument that this is "a non-medically indicated procedure performed without the father's consent." But that belongs to an entirely different legal and ethical discussion, one that could, at a stretch, be compared with piercings or tattoos performed on minors—or with finding another reason to quarrel with Miss Z than over the skin of this little child.

	contacter Aharon Altabé
www.milah.fr ----- Mise à jour