Skip to content

Interview with Onkar Sharma on ‘Justifications’ for Circumcision and FGM


Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2018/12/02

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What are the standard justifications for circumcision, where you live, and around the world?

Onkar Sharma: It’s very much practiced all over. As for circumcision, in European countries, it is not practiced as a rule. Now there is a ban; unless, sexual health demands it.

Muslims and Jews quote religion-based tradition. The campaign has been started by groups of young men all over the USA. They are trying hard to ask policymakers to put a ban on such practices. Hindus generally do not practice it. In rare cases, on health grounds but by medical doctors.

Jacobsen: Are justifications for circumcision legitimate or illegitimate? Why are these, typically, imposed on men with circumcision and on women with FGM?

Sharma: It is not legitimate and should be banned all over unless Medical condition (phimosis) calls for it.

Circumcision in no way can prevent masturbation. In fact, it increases the urge for sex masturbation is the way to still the urge. More men with circumcised penises masturbate than those without.

Yes, its primary intention was that, even in ancient times, and, more generally, to diminish sexual pleasure for the male. According to religion, sex was supposed to be for procreation, and not for pleasure.

Jacobsen: What would reduce the rate of implementation of them? How can policymakers and health professionals inform the public for health campaigns to reduce this practice based on ignorance?

Sharma: Absolutely correct. If the natural human body were so unhealthy, then Hinduism (Sanatan Dharma) would have disappeared in India centuries ago.

In yoga, the tradition is that the body is the finest tool for achieving wisdom, integrity, and wholeness as a human being, and that, as such, the whole body is to be protected against any non-essential mutilation.

Of course, in the very rare cases of medical necessity, medical intervention is preferable to serious health problems or death.

Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Mr. Sharma.


In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at


© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: