RE: CIRCUMCISION. Dana writes, "since evidence clearly shows circumcision protects men and their partners from a variety of sexually transmitted infections, we should be promoting the practice, not among grown men who may see the procedure as an alternative to safe sex, but among expectant parents. Get 'em while they're young and you can give them the anatomical benefits of circumcision alongside the lessons about protection and contraception." Sigh. Easy for her to say. Andrew Sullivan has actually been arguing against circumcision this week on his blog, and his points seem fairly sound to me, if a little overblown It's the sort of practice that, were we not already doing it and accustomed to it, we'd think a wacky and indefensible invasion of personal rights. And as for the public health argument, that's one thing in Africa, where AIDS is taking a genocidal turn. It's even another in New York, where it's still a problem. But does that really make sense in Arkansas, with .4 percent of the nation's AIDS cases? Maybe Garance, who used to do AIDS activism in NYC, could weigh in? --Ezra Klein
