CIRCUMCISION: What It Does, by Billy Ray Boyd; $6.95, Taterhill Press. About a year ago, just before becoming an uncle I complained to my mother that the pamphlets I'd sent my sister had failed to convince her. "If it's a boy, they're going to circumcize him. If it's a girl they're going to name her Tina Tindall." Mother shared the horror of having either a mutilated grandson or else a granddaugher with an alliterative monicker suggesting a John Waters anti-hera. We plotted to snatch the child before damage could be done and give it to properly sensible Lesbians. I then went into mild shock realizing that my mother had had a proper education far too late for my benefit. Well, Dear Reader, I have good news. My lovely niece was named Melissa, and a new book provides compelling arguments against the generally dying and sometimes deadly practice of circumcision. The author of "Circumcision" makes no pretense of neutrality. As the intellectual traditions of our culture respect neutrality over commitment this dedication may work against him. The book is an excellent resource for those of us who are opposed to infant circumcision (and what connoisseur of male genitalia isn't?) Whether we are planning parenthood or wish to lobby our reproductive friends and relatives in favor of leaving their sons intact this book is a must. On the other hand it may be a bit heavy handed to send directly to friends considering the question from a more "neutral" position. Read it for yourself. Consider whether you'd rather send it to the parents to be or simply to offer the arguments and references most relevant to their specific issues. Quite a few sensitive points are covered here, perhaps some are too sensitive for direct exposure. Can one truly be neutral on the subject? On what basis does one accept routine circumcision? If one views it as a form of mutilation, obviously there is no neutrality. If one accepts circumcision unquestioningly "neutrality" is a cover for ignorance. There have been studies that support circumcision as a form of prophylaxis, but in this book they are demonstrated as having flawed bases. Other studies, critical of routine circumcision, have been misrepresented in the press. In any event, the very real damages from a slip of the snip far outnumber the statistical linkages to diseases that some doctors cite off-the-cuff. (It is also noteworthy that circumcision is a money maker. Doctors annually make hundreds of millions at a fast clip!) There is an entire chapter dealing with circumcision among Jews. Boyd goes to great effort to condemn any anti-Semitism, and to expose skinhead tendencies which indeed exist in the "preservationist" movement. I personally find it exhausting to wade through •goyische ”protestations of sympathy to Jews, just as it gets tedious to hear straights insist at length that they are pro-Gay, but considering the subject matter he is indeed better off erring on the side of caution. Fortunately Boyd has done his homework and provides enough information to head off the next bris in my family! The author reports on variations of circumcision techniques at various times in Jewish history. For example, at the birth of the Reform Movement circumcision was rejected and later re-adopted. At many times the mohel would only remove the tip of the skin -- not peel it off the glans as is commonly done now. In Europe many Jews today do not practice circumcision, and regard it as barbarous. Even in America -- the only secular nation where circumcision is considered routine -- a growing number of Jews are practing the "Bris Shalom," an infant naming ceremony that allows boys to remain uncut. A number of Jewish leaders in the preservationist movement are also listed --including local video health maven, Dean Edell. There are also quotes from pro-circumcisionists, both Talmudic and Victorian, showing the eratophobic roots of the practice. Starkly revealed, the point is to diminish sexual pleasure. Europe has drawn the shade on this puritanical practice, and such roundheaded nonsense is in the decline even in America. The principle rationale for circumcision today is conformity, but even here the proportions of uncut organs are growing and parents who wish their boys to fit in should leave well enough alone. While the book concentrates on male circumcision there is also some discussion of female circumcision -- practiced in certain African and Arab cultures. This may include a clitoridectomy and/or various mutilations of the labia. The details are horrifying. Anyone concerned with the most basic of human rights should be up in arms against involuntary genital mutilation -- but then why do we commonly accept the damage done to baby boys? Even if a successful circumcision is not considered damaging one in five hundred is not successful, leading to further mutilation, impotence, and sometimes death. The appendices include resources for information and action, including Jewish support groups and foreskin restoration techniques. Altoghether this is an invaluable text for anyone who would spare the rod, and not spoil the child.