top of page
Recent Posts
Featured Posts

Another Blood Stained Man accuses Circumcision Choice of putting words in his mouth

October 3, 2017

Two weeks ago James Loewen of the Blood Stained Men leadership team denied writing that he would like to see a film that portrays circumcision specialists being brutally tortured and killed. Mr. Loewen's followers expressed disbelief that he would have expressed such a malicious thought. The sentiment that "none of that sounds like the style of anything James has ever said or written" was universally shared.

On Monday Kenneth Hopkins - the leader of the Blood Stained Men who calls himself "Brother K" - also accused us of putting words in his mouth. Our "Intactivists are bullies" file shows that Hopkins once asked a mother to send him a photo of her son's penis - on the pretext that he would point out scarring from circumcision. Using his companion's account, he told his followers that we photoshopped the comment. He insisted that he "NEVER asked for such a photo, has NO interest in such a photo, and would be repulsed to receive such a photo."


Another screen shot shows that Hopkins refused to believe that a mother's son was uncircumcised, and he demanded, "Post your intact son." Several parents have reported that he made similar requests to them. He's also asked followers to film a newborn hospital circumcision (a HIPAA Privacy Rule violation) and send him the video.

After we forced Mr. Loewen to take responsibility for his comment, he tried to save face by claiming that our sign took his sentence out of context. (Mr. Loewen hasn't explained how ANY context justifies a desire to see a depiction of doctors being tortured and murdered just because they perform circumcision.)

Hopkins's followers previously defended his solicitations, claiming they were for educational purposes and we took them out of context. It's telling that they now recognize that there is NEVER a legitimate reason for him to request a photo of a child's private parts.

While our adversaries have said much about Circumcision Choice over the past year, they cannot produce a single instance in which we knowingly made a false statement. Our fans and followers trust us to provide accurate information. Just as our accusation against James Loewen was proven true, the screen shots of Hopkins's comments are equally authentic. Those screen shots are genuine and unaltered (except for partially blocking a mother's name and photo.) We guarantee that every screen shot in our posts and files is true and unaltered in any material way.

Yesterday Hopkins indicated that the comment was conceived by a "depraved imagination." We agree. Kenneth Hopkins posted each comment that he now denies writing. Hopkins is not just a bully, he is a pathological liar (and those who continue to believe him deceive themselves.) Based on a reasonable interpretation of his comments, it isn't difficult to conclude that he is a pervert ... and maybe worse.

Circumcision Choice won't be fazed by brazen falsehoods, implausible excuses, or emphatic denials. In the coming months, we'll present proof that leaders of the largest anti-circumcision organization in the United States routinely fabricate. Stay tuned.

Follow Us
Search By Tags
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square
bottom of page