包皮环切术辩论中对接的幽灵

IF 2.1 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
J. Allan
{"title":"包皮环切术辩论中对接的幽灵","authors":"J. Allan","doi":"10.1177/13634607231199407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This articles considers the ongoing penile circumcision debates by focusing on the deployment of ‘docking,’ a sexual practice between men. Docking involves pulling one’s foreskin over the glans of another penis. In this article, I consider both “anti” and “pro” circumcision literature and the use of docking in the service of arguments about the procedure. I show that the use of docking can be traced to Daniel M. Harrison’s article “Rethinking Circumcision and Sexuality in the United States” published in Sexualities. Ultimately, I argue that while docking is interesting to consider, it remains something of spectre that haunts the debates more than it is an empirical concern. Consequently, I argue that further study is needed about docking in general, as well as in the particular context of circumcision debates.","PeriodicalId":51454,"journal":{"name":"Sexualities","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The spectre of docking in circumcision debates\",\"authors\":\"J. Allan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13634607231199407\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This articles considers the ongoing penile circumcision debates by focusing on the deployment of ‘docking,’ a sexual practice between men. Docking involves pulling one’s foreskin over the glans of another penis. In this article, I consider both “anti” and “pro” circumcision literature and the use of docking in the service of arguments about the procedure. I show that the use of docking can be traced to Daniel M. Harrison’s article “Rethinking Circumcision and Sexuality in the United States” published in Sexualities. Ultimately, I argue that while docking is interesting to consider, it remains something of spectre that haunts the debates more than it is an empirical concern. Consequently, I argue that further study is needed about docking in general, as well as in the particular context of circumcision debates.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51454,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sexualities\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sexualities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634607231199407\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexualities","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634607231199407","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章通过关注男性之间性行为“对接”的部署,来考虑正在进行的阴茎包皮环切术辩论。对接包括将一个人的包皮套在另一个阴茎的龟头上。在这篇文章中,我考虑了“反对”和“支持”包皮环切术的文献,以及对接在服务于有关手术的争论中的使用。我证明对接的使用可以追溯到Daniel M.Harrison在《性》杂志上发表的文章《反思美国的包皮环切术和性行为》。最终,我认为,虽然对接是一个有趣的考虑,但它仍然是一个幽灵,比它是一个经验问题更能困扰辩论。因此,我认为,在一般情况下,以及在包皮环切术辩论的特定背景下,需要对对接进行进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The spectre of docking in circumcision debates
This articles considers the ongoing penile circumcision debates by focusing on the deployment of ‘docking,’ a sexual practice between men. Docking involves pulling one’s foreskin over the glans of another penis. In this article, I consider both “anti” and “pro” circumcision literature and the use of docking in the service of arguments about the procedure. I show that the use of docking can be traced to Daniel M. Harrison’s article “Rethinking Circumcision and Sexuality in the United States” published in Sexualities. Ultimately, I argue that while docking is interesting to consider, it remains something of spectre that haunts the debates more than it is an empirical concern. Consequently, I argue that further study is needed about docking in general, as well as in the particular context of circumcision debates.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sexualities
Sexualities SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Consistently one of the world"s leading journals in the exploration of human sexualities within a truly interdisciplinary context, Sexualities publishes peer-reviewed, scholarly articles that exemplify the very best of current research. It is published six times a year and aims to present cutting-edge debate and review for an international readership of scholars, lecturers, postgraduate students and advanced undergraduates. Sexualities publishes work of an analytic and ethnographic nature which describes, analyses, theorizes and provides a critique on the changing nature of the social organization of human sexual experience in the late modern world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信