Male Circumcision and Fragile White Masculinity

• In Event: 2303 - Sociologies of Fragility: Gender, Sexuality, Race and the Politics of Emotion

Abstract

This paper explores how the concepts of fragile masculinity and white fragility can illuminate the diverse ways in which gender—intersecting with race, nationality, and other identities—inflects public controversy over routine circumcision in the United States, Canada, and Great Britain. Data for this qualitative analysis come from a multi-sited ethnography following the actors that drove the public debate over foreskin removal from 1985 to 2015: medical associations, biomedical and social scientists, grassroots activists, journalists, and religious organizations. Attending to the intersection of fragile masculinity and white fragility can connect and make sense of seemingly disparate findings: (1) Beliefs about males, men, and masculinity have shaped circumcision practices—and vice versa; (2) Fathers have the major say over circumcision (unlike other pediatric practices); (3) Comparing circumcision to female genital cutting seems logical to some people, but appalling to many others; (4) Experts bristle when potential ethical or practical problems with circumcision as an HIV preventive are mentioned. My analysis shows how debate participants’ membership in privileged social groups—such as white, middle-class men—react defensively when their group's worldview and self-image (that circumcised penises are normal and preferable) are challenged, thereby shoring up their privilege. In addition to demonstrating how fragile identities are sociological and structural, not just psychological, I consider what the case of circumcision controversy can tell us about fragile masculinity and white fragility more generally.

Author

• Laura M. Carpenter, Vanderbilt University