top of page
Recent Posts
Featured Posts



April 7, 2017 Continuing the story of our counter protest

James Loewen apparently assumed that our Circumcision Choice group had prepared placards as handouts in order to distribute his personal contact information to the members of the AAP or to the general public – a practice known as doxxing. The sole purpose of revealing Loewen’s contact information in visual and verbal form was to give him a motivation to stop filming us. We saw what he had done to others who disagree with him, and we were not going to give him the opportunity to do that to us.

We made it clear we did not wish to be filmed. Once our request was ignored, we held up the placards – so if he chose to film us, he would be filming his own personal information. In order to share online, he would have to heavily edit the film, redacting major portions of the video and audio, resulting in a much less compelling product for his intended audience. Our effort to prevent Loewen’s distribution of the recording was successful, as the video has not been posted on Facebook or YouTube to date.

Loewen made several false statements about our team. He called everyone in the photographs "pro child cutters." However, no one in the photos he posted (a) performs circumcisions, or (b) identifies as pro circumcision. Everyone in that photograph supports a parent's right to choose.

Over the next several days Loewen described our team using several vitriolic terms. He called us “imbeciles,” “trolls,” “dumb,” “ignorant,” “pathetic,” “despicable,” and “human ignorance at it’s [sic] lowest point.” He accused our counter-protesters of being mercenaries who were paid to protest.

In addition to misrepresenting our purpose, Loewen falsely claimed that we ended our protest in disgrace when they established the identity of a member of our team. This claim is preposterous, since the person in question had introduced himself to several intactivists, including the executive director of Intact America. He also ventured into “enemy territory” to introduce himself to Rosemary Romberg, an intactivist who had traveled from Alaska to San Francisco. And our team members had always planned to leave at a specific time. We had plans to rest up before a dinner reservation at Fisherman’s Wharf.

By his defamatory comments James Loewen encouraged physical violence against our team. One of his followers commented, “Find out who’s handing out the info. Ill [sic] kick his fucking ass … or her fucking ass.” Loewen liked the comment, indicating his approval, inviting and encouraging threats.

Shortly after posting the photos Loewen promised his followers. “There is a ‘happy ending’ to this counter-protest. I cannot say just yet, but I assure you will enjoy the outcome. Stay tuned.”

Whatever “happy ending” the filmmaker teased for his followers never came to pass. Perhaps he anticipated some sort of legal action, and his attorney advised him that he had no case. Perhaps he planned to expose our identities or reveal embarrassing information. Of course no such disclosure has occurred. Since Loewen always posts his interviews of pro-circumcision subjects online, his failure to post any video of his interaction with us was the very outcome that we had intended, and the single purpose of our preparation!

Tomorrow: So long, farewell

Smile for the Irate Man behind the camera

April 7, 2017 - Part 6: Lies, Lies, Lies ... Yeah! April 8, 2017 - Part 7: Conclusion September 23, 2017: The Irate Man accuses Circumcision Choice of dishonest tactics September 24, 2017: Update: The Irate Man's continuing dishonesty


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