Sir: Having read a school doctor's observa- tions on the
subject of penile hygiene (Let- ters, 20 June), I am bound to predict that we will henceforth experience an expanding debate surrounding the relative merits of circumcision, one reminiscent of the tedious and protracted 'good Pom, bad Pom' exchanges. I believe, moreover, that the subject will swiftly evolve into an associ- ation with breeding: unscathed: 'IP; clipped: 'non-U'.
In order to forestall such tedious corre- spondence, perhaps I could suggest a pre- emptive strike in the form of an issue devoted entirely to the topic. Leading the charge, of course, should be extensive input from Dr Dalrymple CI was victimised, weren't I, doctor, on account of 'ow they slashed me when I was born'). Perhaps a brief insertion from Mark Steyn, citing hitherto unquoted sources on the 'state' of President Clinton; a,theological perspective from Paul Johnson and, of course, Miss Killen's thoughts on how one might, so to speak, gently raise the matter without giv- ing offence.
Enlightening international perspective could no doubt be garnered from the vons Schlieffen and Billow, not to mention Taki, who might be persuaded to unleash a salvo in the direction of Mr Al Fayed, thus pre- cipitating a thunderous response from Michael Cole (sadly absent from these pages for some months).
Do, please, give serious thought to taking a position of leadership by bringing this brewing controversy to a head.
Michael Hooley
1520 Adams Avenue, St Charles, Illinois, USA
Previous page
