• Our Team
  • Initiatives
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Support Us
  • Donate

The Locker Room Argument Is Weak—Here’s Why

locker room argument

One of the most common defenses of circumcision is the so-called locker room argument:

“I don’t want my son to feel different from the other boys.”

But let’s break that down for a second. What are you actually saying? That you’re so afraid of your kid standing out that you’d rather surgically alter his body as a newborn than let him develop confidence and self-assurance on his own?

That’s not parenting. That’s cowardice.

Here’s what most people won’t tell you: The locker room argument is outdated. Circumcision rates are dropping. Your son isn’t going to be the odd one out—if anything, he’ll be part of a growing number of boys who were spared from an unnecessary cosmetic procedure at birth.

But even if that weren’t the case, here’s the real question: Since when is “looking like everyone else” a valid reason for unnecessary surgery?

Let’s say you’re in a gym shower, and you notice another guy has different ears than you—maybe his stick out a little more, maybe he has attached lobes instead of detached.

Do you assume his parents should have cut and reshaped his ears at birth to make them “match” the other guys’?

Sounds ridiculous, right?

Yet somehow, when it comes to circumcision, we act like altering a child’s genitals for aesthetic reasons is normal.

It’s not. It’s insane.

 

Confidence Over Conformity

If you raise a child who defines their self-worth by whether or not they “match” everyone else, they’ll struggle to find their true identity.

The goal isn’t to make sure he blends in. The goal is to make sure he stands tall, no matter what.

Real confidence doesn’t come from looking like everyone else. It comes from knowing you’re good enough as you are.

A boy who grows up knowing his body was left whole—that his parents didn’t cave to outdated traditions or social pressure—will grow up with an advantage:

He knows his worth wasn’t up for debate.

Meanwhile, what about the boys who were circumcised for no other reason than conformity? Eventually, many of them find out the truth:

That it wasn’t medically necessary.
That it wasn’t cleaner.
That their parents did it so they wouldn’t “stand out.”

How do you think that realization feels?

 

What’s More Embarrassing—Being Intact, or Realizing You Were Cut for No Reason?

Let’s talk about embarrassment. Because, ironically, a lot of the same people who argue that intact men will feel insecure are the same ones who had this decision made for them as babies—without their consent.

And once a circumcised man starts digging into the facts, the real embarrassment kicks in:

  • Realizing a permanent decision about your body was made based on social norms instead of logic.
  • Finding out that intact men have zero issues with cleanliness or function.
  • Understanding that the so-called “locker room argument” was nothing more than a weak excuse to keep an unnecessary tradition going.

If there’s one thing that should make you uncomfortable, it’s not being different—it’s realizing you were altered just to fit in.

 

Cutting Your Son Doesn’t Prevent Insecurity—It Creates It

circumcision

Let’s entertain the worst-case scenario:

Your son is intact. He grows up. He ends up in a locker room or a bedroom with someone who has never seen an intact penis before.

What happens next?

He has two choices:

  1. Feel insecure and ashamed that he’s different.
  2. Own it, knowing his body is whole, healthy, and exactly how nature intended it.

Which outcome happens? It depends on how he was raised.

A kid who grows up hearing, “You’re perfect the way you are. We left you intact because you were born perfect,” will not be bothered by someone else’s ignorance.

A kid who grows up in an environment that treats differences as shameful, however, will feel the need to conform—no matter how irrational the expectation is.

And that’s why circumcision doesn’t prevent insecurity. It feeds it.

It teaches boys that their worth is based on matching rather than being whole.

That’s a poor lesson to pass down.

 

Conformity Is Weak—Confidence Is Strong

At the end of the day, which type of man do you want to raise?

A man who bases his confidence on whether or not he looks like the next guy?

Or a man who knows that his worth, confidence, and masculinity aren’t tied to unnecessary surgery performed when he was too young to consent?

If we want to raise confident, self-assured sons, we need to stop making fear-based decisions.

Conformity is for the weak. Confidence is for those who stand their ground.

 

Final Thought: Don’t Cut Your Son Just Because You Were Cut

Some dads push circumcision simply because they don’t want to admit they were robbed of a choice.

But that’s not logic—that’s justifying trauma.

If you weren’t given a choice, why would you repeat that mistake for your son?

If anything, you should be the first person to say, “I wish I’d had the choice—so I’m making sure my son does.”

That’s confidence. That’s breaking the cycle. That’s strength.

So forget the locker room argument.

Forget conformity.

Raise a son who knows he was never “wrong” or “incomplete” to begin with.

Because that’s what confidence looks like.

Author

No Comments

Post a Comment

Skin in the Game Awards

Join us to honor Alan Cumming at the Inaugural Skin in the Game Awards.

4.30.25, NYC

For More Information

Marilyn

Marilyn Fayre Milos, multiple award winner for her humanitarian work to end routine infant circumcision in the United States and advocating for the rights of infants and children to genital autonomy, has written a warm and compelling memoir of her path to becoming “the founding mother of the intactivist movement.” Needing to support her family as a single mother in the early sixties, Milos taught banjo—having learned to play from Jerry Garcia (later of The Grateful Dead)—and worked as an assistant to comedian and social critic Lenny Bruce, typing out the content of his shows and transcribing court proceedings of his trials for obscenity. After Lenny’s death, she found her voice as an activist as part of the counterculture revolution, living in Haight Ashbury in San Francisco during the 1967 Summer of Love, and honed her organizational skills by creating an alternative education open classroom (still operating) in Marin County. 

After witnessing the pain and trauma of the circumcision of a newborn baby boy when she was a nursing student at Marin College, Milos learned everything she could about why infants were subjected to such brutal surgery. The more she read and discovered, the more convinced she became that circumcision had no medical benefits. As a nurse on the obstetrical unit at Marin General Hospital, she committed to making sure parents understood what circumcision entailed before signing a consent form. Considered an agitator and forced to resign in 1985, she co-founded NOCIRC (National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers) and began organizing international symposia on circumcision, genital autonomy, and human rights. Milos edited and published the proceedings from the above-mentioned symposia and has written numerous articles in her quest to end circumcision and protect children’s bodily integrity. She currently serves on the board of directors of Intact America.

Georganne

Georganne Chapin is a healthcare expert, attorney, social justice advocate, and founding executive director of Intact America, the nation’s most influential organization opposing the U.S. medical industry’s penchant for surgically altering the genitals of male children (“circumcision”). Under her leadership, Intact America has definitively documented tactics used by U.S. doctors and healthcare facilities to pathologize the male foreskin, pressure parents into circumcising their sons, and forcibly retract the foreskins of intact boys, creating potentially lifelong, iatrogenic harm. 

Chapin holds a BA in Anthropology from Barnard College, and a Master’s degree in Sociomedical Sciences from Columbia University. For 25 years, she served as president and chief executive officer of Hudson Health Plan, a nonprofit Medicaid insurer in New York’s Hudson Valley. Mid-career, she enrolled in an evening law program, where she explored the legal and ethical issues underlying routine male circumcision, a subject that had interested her since witnessing the aftermath of the surgery conducted on her younger brother. She received her Juris Doctor degree from Pace University School of Law in 2003, and was subsequently admitted to the New York Bar. As an adjunct professor, she taught Bioethics and Medicaid and Disability Law at Pace, and Bioethics in Dominican College’s doctoral program for advanced practice nurses.

In 2004, Chapin founded the nonprofit Hudson Center for Health Equity and Quality, a company that designs software and provides consulting services designed to reduce administrative complexities, streamline and integrate data collection and reporting, and enhance access to care for those in need. In 2008, she co-founded Intact America.

Chapin has published many articles and op-ed essays, and has been interviewed on local, national and international television, radio and podcasts about ways the U.S. healthcare system prioritizes profits over people’s basic needs. She cites routine (nontherapeutic) infant circumcision as a prime example of a practice that wastes money and harms boys and the men they will become. This Penis Business: A Memoir is her first book.