Funny, why do you share so many pictures? only about 10 of splash jungle but 50 of this???

Editor: On the basis of your inability to count and your capacity to jump to idiotic conclusions, you have a great future as a Fox News political commentator.

Posted by j on April 8, 2010 18:46

Shouldn't this be done somewhere more sanitary, like a hospital?
Can we please have a followup and let us know how many of these poor boys escaped a staff infection!

Editor: If you seriously want a staff infection, head for a hospital, especially in a Western city. This is a bit like the Americans in the local markets, who can't believe meat comes without wrapping.

Posted by VFaye on April 8, 2010 21:58

I wish one could get one's sons done as easily as that in England. My own son is circumcised.

Posted by malpaschick on April 9, 2010 01:19

Ouch!

Posted by Sean on April 9, 2010 10:14

I don't understand how you expect to build traffic to your website when you treat your readers with such contempt.

Poor 'j' hardly deserved such a vicious retort. You could have just posted a reasoned response to his question. And in the next comment you take a pot shot at Americans!

Just be nice!

Editor: I don't take the shameful innuendo in 'j's comment lightly. If readers treat us with respect, the rejoinders will be equally respectful. 'j's thoughtless, factually incorrect slur was treated with the contempt it deserved.

Potshot at Americans? Are you kidding?

Posted by Dick Pintsman on April 9, 2010 14:22

You're reading innuendo where there is none.

People want to see pictures of splash jungle because a) it's visually interesting and b) they might want to go there.

There didn't need to be quite so many pictures to tell this story - and some of them, quite frankly, are stomach churning.

Editor: You've missed the point. We published several photo specials on the water park, with many more photos than those accompanying this article. The shameful innuendo was that we prefer this kind of photograph. We deal with real life. The habits of your stomach are of no great interest.

Posted by Dick Pintsman on April 9, 2010 15:07

"If readers treat us with respect, the rejoinders will be equally respectful."

Is that the way modern media work? A decent news publication doesn't stoop to advertising its vitriol. One never sees it in The Telegraph, SCMP, NYT... Your attitude might be mistaken for that of a bitchy old queen, but perhaps, like the British TV quiz show, "The Weakest Link", we humble readers write in to you half-expecting, perhaps wanting, a bit of verbal abuse.

Nah, you're just a bitchy old queen and an amateur news blogger, despite your years in the news biz, awards & cet...

Editor: Your insults destroy any credibility your argument might otherwise have had. Those kinds of insults are moderated out of the NYT, the Telegraph, the SCMP etc.

Posted by Simon Law on April 9, 2010 15:26

A wonderful rite of passage made even more meaningful for the boys by being performed as a group ceremony.

Whilst religiously required, early circumcision provides a lifetime of improved health and sexual pleasure for the male and his partner.

If only circumcision were so well respected and widely available in Europe.

Posted by V on April 9, 2010 15:51

Arguments are valid, regardless of insults.

However, I am intrigued as to which insults are moderated out of the organs I mentioned; those from the readers or those from the staff? I have read plenty of criticism of those papers in those papers, rarely, if ever, have I seen insults from the editor making their ways into their Letters' pages.

Professionals tend to be less confrontational than you are.

Editor: There you go, delivering another sly, slurring insult, and an undeserved one. We are not a newspaper, and we don't have a Letters page. Letters to newspapers are usually from real people with real opinions. The Letters editor is able to confirm each letter is genuine. The same rules do not apply online. Nevertheless, most opinions are valid. Most readers do their research. We encourage intelligent comments. We are keen to read informed criticism and debate. Some comments, though, are purposefully couched to insult or undermine the professionalism of this site. They are the ones that will draw a spirited response. And we'll continue to give as good as we get.

Posted by Simon Law on April 9, 2010 16:35

I find such practices barbaric enough but to photograph the poor children and then post the photos on the web in gory detail defies words.

Editor: This probably means you are not a photojournalist. We portray the world as it is, not as some people would wish it to be. You see 'poor children' and 'gory detail'. Others may see a cultural ritual explained, perhaps for the first time. There are fewer wars these days because people everywhere are better informed.

Posted by Roland Millbank on April 9, 2010 16:55

As I was reading this article, I found myself feeling more and more disgusted and disturbed to my core. The undue intimacy felt almost pornographic at times. Not to mention the entirely unnecessary posting of children's pictures.

Editor: Well, I didn't intend to disturb your core. I must say, though, that anyone who finds circumcision even vaguely pornographic probably needs therapy immediately.

Posted by Mary Schreiber on April 9, 2010 17:44

This shows just how England has slipped back. It is much more difficult and expensive to arrange circumcision here nowadays! I am circumcised and my wife and I would not want it to be any other way - much better without that foreskin!

Posted by Ponysteel on April 9, 2010 18:15

You are right. My newborn got a staff infection in the hospital. Together with three other newborns... a not so funny hospital strain.

To the other things, I would also like you to not show pictures of naked boys laying up front like there are some. It is the internet and you do not know, where this pictures will end.

As a parent I would not allow anyone to photograph or even publicise the private parts of my sons. I wish, you would take that pictures down. The other ones still tell the story.

As it is interesting to see in detail the joy and pain of this ceremony. Thanks for the article.

Posted by Lena on April 9, 2010 19:11

Whew when I was done, I was only a few days old.
But gee wizz, I did loose 900 grams of ugly fat in the process.Been happier ever since.

Anyone who thinks this is pornographic or child abuse should check out female circumcision in Africa, then you can talk about abuse.

Posted by Dun on April 9, 2010 19:19

Reading these comments, I think you're a bit schizophrenic! Phuketwan acts like a newspaper or news deliverer (giving news, entertaining, informing and educating) yet retreats from such an association when pulled up for acting like a personal blog (insulting respondents). So what are you?

BTW aside from its original meaning of writings about prostitutes, pornography now can mean lurid or sensational material. Plenty of publications (or whatever yours is) can be classed as presenting pornographic material without the material having anything to do with sex! BTW "Staff infection"? I think you mean "staph infection" as in staphylococcus aureus.

Editor: Yes, you're right about ''staph.''

Phuketwan is an online news and information site. Pigeon-holing (blog, newspaper) is not a characteristic of this site. And the concept that we should accept unjustified criticism without response comes as news to us.

Posted by Lucy Humble on April 9, 2010 19:30

Editor: Chalong Boy, circumcision was quite popular in the West for at least a couple of generations. Clearly, today it remains a matter of choice (mostly for parents rather than boys) and of communal preference in some cultures. How this event and these photographs are perceived is also a matter of choice. Some people with particularly strong views on light and shade seem to think the photographs themselves are a problem. We disagree. The event, although perhaps confronting to some outsiders, was (and is) a joyous one and innocent in every respect. Phuket's Vegetarian Festival, with its tradition of body-piercing, is just as confronting for some. We were privileged to be granted free and friendly access to this community celebration. Indeed, tolerance and generosity of spirit are a strong part of all of the significant cultural events on Phuket that we've seen and recorded. We'd suggest that those who find the photographs less than innocent should perhaps first question why they see more shade than light.

Posted by Chalong Boy on April 10, 2010 03:21

You say "Clearly, today it remains a matter of choice (mostly for parents rather than boys)" but I query "mostly" and "rather". I also query that it was ever "popular". It was imposed on parents when doctors were little tin gods, until they accepted it as automatic. It has since been imposed by bogus fears of myriad diseases and of non-conformity. It was only ever "popular" in the English-speaking world, and today only in the US, South Korea and the Philippines - and Israel of course - outside Islam.

Posted by Hugh7 on April 10, 2010 08:20

What kind of a perv are you? [various similar comments edited] For heavens sake, why are these children lying on a filthy floor???

Editor: You need to get out more, Anonymous. In Thailand and many other Asian countries, the floors are kept spotlessly clean. People leave their shoes at the doors. You're locked into a very narrow view of the world, and of other cultures.

Posted by Anonymous on April 10, 2010 15:48

My family here is muslim, and circumcision is a very public event. The families and children will enjoy the special day being publicised. Anyone who finds those photos pornographic is very ill indeed.

And if those photos are confronting, how do people cope with the gory photos in Thai newspapers?

Congrats to the editor for having the courage to post the story and photos, and the good taste to leave out gory crash photos.

By the way, my dad needed a new fanbelt for the car, so I was done years ago. Kept slipping but.

Posted by mark on April 10, 2010 23:04

I'm American and was circumcised as a baby. I am now a physician and have travelled around the world for work and pleasure. I have learned about circumcision in and the functions of the foreskin and feel that it should be illegal for any child to have this done to them. It they chose as an adult then it's their choice. Children's sexual organs should be left alone...whether they are boys or girls...we should he trying to move forward to a world that recognises that.

Posted by Brian on April 11, 2010 05:04

Phuket Wan, your online editor's ego and it's ugly manifestation in retorts is doing your site no good. And you're becoming quite blatant in showing hatred for other Nationalities.

Editor: Mediawatcher, I don't hate anyone, but I do not appreciate your hypocrisy and your constant capacity to carp and misinterpret. Whichever of the many aliases you use, you have never shown one single iota of generosity of spirit or contributed a single useful idea. As for hate . . . words fail me for once.

Posted by MediaWatcher on April 11, 2010 08:36

Why did you remove parts of my comment?

Editor: Because there is no evidence to support your assertion that these boys are being abused. It's an unfair and inaccurate reflection on their parents and all other parents who have opted for circumcision. To debate the merits of circumcision is reasonable, but it's not abuse by any stretch of the imagination. Given that we were generously permitted to photograph the celebration, it would be less than fair to allow that part of your comment to pass without this rejoinder. So I snipped you. Sorry about the pain.

Posted by Brian on April 11, 2010 10:38

I find it hard to comprehend why this article has drawn so much negative comment and bias. In a time where cultural understanding and tolerance is so important I am surprised that an article that informs and gives insight into a little publicised ritual and a misunderstood religion is met with such negativity.

I personally read things on the web to be informed, enlightened and to increase my knowledge/understanding of others. If I want to be sheltered I don't have to look. The only "reasons" given here seem to be based on personal issues and not on any factual basis.

Thank you for informing me on something that I not only was unaware of but probably would never have learned about anywhere else. While I don't always agree with the editor of this site I do respect his right to choose what he wants to publish. In this case it was a wise choice.

Posted by YaThinkDoctor? on April 11, 2010 11:11

"it's not abuse by any stretch of the imagination."
If it were any other healthy, normal, functional, non-renewable part of a boy's body (such as an earlobe or little toe), or the exactly corresponding part of a girl's body cut off under identical conditions and without her informed consent, would it not be abuse? What's the difference?

"Given that we were generously permitted to photograph the celebration, it would be less than fair to allow that part of your comment to pass without this rejoinder."

What has your obligation toward the circumcisers got to do with whether it is abuse or not?

Editor: Please name a country in which male circumcision is classed as abuse. As I said, it's an insult to the parents of these boys, and all parents who have permitted circumcision, to call it abuse. Males don't need foreskins. If circumcision was categorised as abuse, here or anywhere else, we wouldn't have run the photographs.

Posted by Hugh7 on April 11, 2010 13:55

On a less serious note, this story reminds me of a bunch of junior high kids.
These kids came from differing backgrounds and so wrote exams on various subjects.
One kid wrote that, " Christopher Columbus circumcised the world with his 40 foot clipper. " Beautiful, but I think the child was looking for the phrase, circumnavigated the world, etc.
Have a peaceful week and happy Sonkran to you all.

Posted by Graham on April 11, 2010 14:54

@Hugh7: if you do it for over 2000 years, it is no abuse any more. It is a deep rooted, nearly DNA inbuilt, cultural habit. Having kids to sit down and be quiet, even if their feet want to move permanently and their voice is build for use big time, could be then considered a much bigger abuse. Initiation rites are a big founding stone for communities or religions.

Only the editors: "Males don't need foreskins", I like more: Males can live without foreskins, because nature normally never gives in excess, even if we think we see no purpose. Removing brings not health or sexual benefit per se. Only in the context of social expectations and standards. Then it can be big.

Posted by Lena on April 11, 2010 15:46

These comments about child abuse and pornography are pathetic!

No wonder there is ALWAYS a war going on in the world, when people are sticking their noses in telling other countries and cultures what they think is right and wrong!

Posted by Sean on April 11, 2010 20:47

Your angry response to my question puts me in the camp of the others who recognise your inability to " report" without personal emotion.

Editor: I consider my response to be level-headed and unemotional. If I was angry, you would know. Nobody ever reports without emotion, and all emotion is, of course, personal: reporters maintain their professionalism and cope. In any event, I've edited your lengthy (and emotional) response because, as I've said more than once, to say that circumcision is abuse insults the parents of these boys and all parents who have agreed to circumcisions. I don't intend to allow your insults to be repeated over and over again. The debate about circumcision will continue, as it should, but this is not the ideal place for it.

Posted by Brian on April 12, 2010 08:32

Editor: Brian, the way to argue your case is to debate the principles and refrain from emotive language or tendentious arguments. Use of words such as ''abuse'' and personal insults do not get much of a play in medical journals, which is where this issue will ''educate'' readers. The rest is just your opinion. For all you know, I may even share your concerns. But this is not the proper forum for a medical debate.

Posted by Brian on April 12, 2010 11:46

Editor: Thanks, Josh, you've proved your ability to absorb information and regurgitate propaganda.

Posted by Josh on April 12, 2010 13:32

Why is this practice still allowed? [And more, edited.]

Marco, circumcision is still legal around the world. If you disagree with it, please make your feelings known to the appropriate authorities.

Posted by Marco Ricci on April 14, 2010 16:06

Oh snap, an editor with a Bill Maher-ish sense of humor. I'll visit here more often now that I know the editor is biting back at silly statements. Oh, it's on now! LOL

Posted by Dave Williams on April 16, 2010 18:45

Editor: Hugh7, thanks for your response but this article was never intended to provide you or other zealots with space to impose your views. When the battles have been won against racism, poverty, smoking and commercial greed, please get back to us.

Posted by Hugh7 on April 17, 2010 08:07

Well done Ed - I just wonder why the slur mongers even bothered to read the aticle (and count/view the pics!!) if it upset them so much!!

By the way I didn't view the pics but enjoyed the article. The proof of the pudding is that the fathers obviously didn't object to your presence, unlike some of the views posted here. Good to see another culture highlighted and a proud day for these Muslims.

Posted by Mister Ree on April 18, 2010 17:41

While I enjoyed reading your article and educating myself on the celebration of other cultures and religions, I do, however understand some of the concerns raised by your readers.
While most people view some photo as innocent, there are some very sick individuals out there in our world who don't and may see a lot more in these photos.
I do not believe in censorship of any type of media or person, I do believe your photos could still have been able to deliver the story require without being so fixed on the children's penises.
It is extremely important story like this educate people of the ceremony & celebration of the family welcoming the path ahead to manhood for the and yes the argument has been made that it is for educational purposes in your defence.
I have seen first hand how a innocent photo of a child can and has been used by sick individuals for some far more evil reasons and while I again defend the right of any media outlet to publish your views or reason. I only ask if you (the editor) believe there was possible a way of presenting this story and highlighting the celebration without opening the possibility that there are individual who are willing and have used photo journalism, social network sites and the like to not only view, but to finance child pornography sites world wide.
I mention social networking sites, due to the recent reports Facebook. Who recently removed a mothers photo of her daughter playing naked on her page, just because they believe the possibly outweighed the benefit of having such photo available.
If you can honestly say that you believe the benefit of publishing this photos as they currently are far out ways the possibility of evil, then you have far more faith in humanity than myself, and I only hope you are right.

Posted by Australia Mother on April 19, 2010 21:13

You asked me to name a country where circumcision is classed as abuse and I named several where it is restricted or its legality is being questioned, but you censored that. So is this just a forum for you to express your views undisturbed? Then why have a comment section at all?

Of course there are more important causes, and less. Since your views amount to support for the status quo, it ill-behoves you to lecture the rest of us about what causes we ought to be promoting.

It would do your readers a courtesy to at least leave our messages posted when you answer them (unless they are offensive, abusive, etc.) If you want anyone to read this, that is.

Editor: This is not an appropriate forum for you to insult the subjects of the story and our readers by hijacking the space for your own zealotry. In the interests of free speech, you have been given space. Now you talk about courtesy. As I said, for all you know, I may agree with much of what you say. This just isn't the place for you to tell us what to do with our lives.

Posted by Hugh7 on April 20, 2010 05:52

"Arguing on the internet is like winning the special Olympics. Maybe you win, but your still retarded!"

I did enjoy this article and the pictures were also interesting.

I just wanted to comment 2 weeks ago, that we got the idea after about 10 pictures...

The number of pictures of innocent young boys getting sections of their dicks cut off provided by Phuketwan was more than adequate.

I didnt count if it was 25 or 50 but it was plenty! I looked at them all and was actually entertained and interested by this cutting edge photo journalism.

My only point was to highlight that while you did a good job here, the pictures accompanying other articles such as Splash Jungle were found to be lacking.

Sorry to start a rumble in the jungle! Help buddha! I appreciated these pictures but hope you improve other pictures on Phuketwan if possible.

I often notice that you seem to be taking a photo of your tv and uploading it? It would be better to use a TV Tuner Card in your computer to caputer much better quality pictures from the (state military run media) tv news reports if this is all thats available (:

Editor: Thanks for catching up. Comparing this report with the Splash Jungle coverage is what triggered my reaction, especially as you will find scores of photos of the new waterpark among our three photo albums on that topic. Photojournalists publish newsy, relevant photos of life as it is, not as some people might wish it to be. Given the unusual nature of this event, we make no apology for covering it thoroughly . . . any comparison with a water park opening, though, remains odious.

Posted by j on April 22, 2010 22:46

Well done in showing an interesting story and in beating off the PC cry-babies from the West. I live in Thailand, but had no idea how it was done here.

I am glad that I had the operation at a few days old... However, I know many males that suffered the indignity and pain of having to be circumcised in adulthood because of infection. In the West, it is becoming more and more difficult to even get your son circumcised if you want it done.

(BTW, spelling is 'staph' (staphylococcus). :)

Posted by ThaiFarang on April 22, 2010 23:32

"This just isn't the place for you to tell us what to do with our lives."

Editor: Hugh7, your ability to argue a case is not in dispute. Your ability to accept another point of view, however, is clearly limited. By constantly attempting to force your views upon us, you diminish your own arguments. i think we've heard all we need to hear.

Posted by Hugh7 on April 24, 2010 10:12

Pot. Kettle. I'm not the one who's deleting your whole case and printing only my reply.

Editor: You are the tout, selling us something we haven't asked to buy, and insulting us all by persevering even though this is not the time and place to market your philosophy. Enough, please. Good luck with your campaign.

Posted by Hugh7 on April 25, 2010 13:47

Non-therapeutic circumcision of children who are too young to consent is a shocking abuse of their human right to security of their person. I am surprised to learn that this offensive practice is tolerated in Thailand.

The editor is to be congratulated on his decision to expose this hideous American practice that is now being adopted in Thailand. I hope that his exposure of this practice will result in its abolition.

Editor: George, you must have missed the extended conversation with Hugh7 and other zealots, or perhaps like them you just choose to ignore what anybody else has to say. Most of us are really not interested in the views of people who are so full of their own moral virtue that they have lost sight of the need for tolerance and understanding. It's a big, round world. Why do you people wish to make it flat? Please take your misguided cultural imperialism and shove it where the sun don't shine.

Posted by George on April 25, 2010 17:06

Editor: John, I haven't expressed an opinion either for or against circumcision, simply reported this event.

Posted by John Dalton on April 27, 2010 01:47

Cutting parts off children's genitals is wrong (except in very rare medical circumstances).

Editor: Male circumcision, which is what this article is about, is legal just about everywhere. But we've already been through this, and my opinion is that this isn't the ideal place for you or any other committed zealot to score points.

Posted by Mark Lyndon on June 20, 2010 09:57

"Male circumcision, which is what this article is about, is legal just about everywhere. But we've already been through this, and my opinion is that this isn't the ideal place for you or any other committed zealot to score points."

Actually it is illegal in quite a few countries, but you dare not show them, do you. If you don't want "zealots" posting on your blog, then you should make it private.

(moderated)

Posted by Joseph4GI on July 20, 2010 07:54

Were the boys embarrassed to be naked especially in front of females? How did the boys react when female relatives happen to see them during the healing process?

Posted by Shannon on August 31, 2010 19:01

Whatever anti-circumcision zealots (many would say bigots) like Hugh7 may think, circumcision is not illegal in any country of the world. A tiny number of countries have placed certain restrictions on it, mainly to prevent it being performed by persons not trained in the arts of preventing bleeding and infection.

There have been many well run clinical trials that now prove beyond doubt that circumcision confers significant medical benefits for both the male himself and his future partners.

There are too many 'do-gooders' around these days who shout from the rooftops views which are not held by the majority as if they were the only right and proper thing to do. These illiberal folk have absolutely no regard for other cultures and little for their own! They should be roundly ignored.

Pornography is 99% in the eye of the beholder. Whilst a certain degree of discretion may be needed in displaying some pictures, folk in one country must not presume to restrict what is perfectly culturally acceptable in others - if there are genuine and widely held views in a particular country that some types of picture are undesirable then it is up to the properly elected authorities of that country to take appropriate technical steps to restrict them from appearing in that country alone. The pictures in the selection here do not show close-ups of any of the boys' penises and what is shown is generally very clinical.

Circumcision, as practiced in several countries, is a joyous occasion for the whole family as another boy 'comes of age' and/or is welcomed into the culture or religion. Some boys may find the actual event temporarily unpleasant, but all will be very glad a few days later when they are fully accepted as part of the community and know that their peers have undergone the same ceremony. This is even more true when mass public circumcision ceremonies, such as reported here, are held for the boys.

As for embarrassment at being seen naked, boys of this age (4-9) have no such embarrassment. Many would run around all the time without any clothing if parents didn't force them into clothes!

Congratulations on presenting this news story in a comprehensive and sympathetic way. Carry on ignoring the desperate bleating of the minuscule minority of outdated sexual misfits who have lost every possible medical and cultural argument against circumcision have to rely on lies, innuendo and ignorance to try to bolster their lost cause.

Posted by V on January 2, 2011 06:31

If circumcision, as some would have us believe, actually yielded such indispensable health benefits, then most of Europe would be racked by the horrible diseases that befall intact males.
The mere fact that the parents of these children agree to having their offspring publicly mutilated under questionable hygienic conditions, does not prove that the practice is not abusive. Unless, of course, one is of the opinion that our children are our property, for us to do with as we please. That notion has, thankfully, gone the way of the Dodo in most civilised societies.

Posted by topcat_PKT on January 3, 2011 10:59

Here's an interesting update that proves there may be advantages to circumcision that haven't been previously considered:

Circumcising men can reduce cervical cancer risk in women, a new study shows.

The study involved more than 1,200 HIV-negative, heterosexual couples living in Uganda, where circumcision of male adults is increasingly encouraged as a means of slowing the spread of HIV/AIDS.

(Reuters) - Researchers have documented yet another health benefit for circumcision, which can protect men against the AIDS virus, saying it can protect their wives and girlfriends from a virus that causes cervical cancer.

Wives and girlfriends of circumcised men had a 28 percent lower rate of infection over two years with the human papilloma virus or HPV, which causes warts and cervical cancer, they reported in the Lancet medical journal on Thursday.

Posted by Angelfire on January 7, 2011 18:23

(moderated)

Posted by Joseph4GI on April 23, 2011 22:07

And quite a few adult Thai males get the "Bobbit treatment"..reshaped, or de-extended members, courtesy of enraged Thai wives, with excess penile bits fed to local lucky ducks or mah key lien soi dogs... all because mia nois are often un-welcomed, and THREE isn't always company in the eyes of the good Thai wives.

Posted by farang888 on August 24, 2014 22:10

Get yourself informed! all. People should be left alone with their body integrity.:

READ:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_and_law

"On 1 October 2013, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted a resolution in which they state they are "particularly worried about a category of violation of the physical integrity of children," and include in this category "circumcision of young boys for religious reasons""

Posted by Joseph on August 25, 2014 09:39