|
Post by mt93 on Jul 13, 2021 14:30:08 GMT -5
Never said on his autopsy. I imaging Charles Lindbergh being born in 1902 to a Swedish immigrant might not have been but I’m wondering in the 1930s they just took the son and cut him without asking the parents?
Do we have any evidence to say that CAL jr was snipped? What about his father?
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,652
|
Post by Joe on Jul 13, 2021 17:10:22 GMT -5
Never said on his autopsy. I imaging Charles Lindbergh being born in 1902 to a Swedish immigrant might not have been but I’m wondering in the 1930s they just took the son and cut him without asking the parents? Do we have any evidence to say that CAL jr was snipped? What about his father? Have never heard one way or another, but would venture he was according to this. I'm curious as to why are you interested. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01233.x"Ironically, although virtually every medical theory supporting circumcision for preventive health was discredited after World War I, it continued to gain in popularity (Darby 2005b; Gollaher 1994). Child-rearing guides and social purity activists extolled circumcision (Darby 2005b). By the mid-1930s, nearly 60 per cent of US boys and 40 per cent of British boys were circumcised, with rates significantly higher among urbanites and the well-to-do (Darby 2005b, Laumann et al. 1997)."
|
|
|
Post by mt93 on Jul 14, 2021 17:03:04 GMT -5
60% was still of course up and rising. I wonder whether Charles Lindbergh himself back in 1902 would have been circumcised. If he wasn’t why would he have let his son be, especially given his anti-Semitic views? Or maybe back in those days they just circumcised all boys born in medical facilities without sling the parents?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jul 15, 2021 14:01:06 GMT -5
Do we have any evidence to say that CAL jr was snipped? What about his father? Never seen anything one way or another. By the time the corpse was discovered, the animals consumed any evidence of it one way or the other. Like Joe, I'm curious why you are interested. If, for example, you were to discover the answer what would that reveal to you?
|
|
|
Post by mt93 on Jul 15, 2021 16:46:57 GMT -5
Do we have any evidence to say that CAL jr was snipped? What about his father? Never seen anything one way or another. By the time the corpse was discovered, the animals consumed any evidence of it one way or the other. Like Joe, I'm curious why you are interested. If, for example, you were to discover the answer what would that reveal to you? That’s a good question. It would possibly be a proxy for Lindbergh’s antisemitism if the baby was left intact. If he wasn’t then that would open up many questions. For instance, was it the case that they just cut him without asking his parents? Did Charles Lindbergh want it despite being likely born intact? Or was he being hypocritical in his antisemitism by allowing his son to be circumcised while he wasn’t? I suppose his birth would have been around a time that the practice tipped into the majority and I just wonder whether CAL had the individuality to say no or whether he was careless and gave in/was a callous monster. I remember reading on another thread the suggestion that the Lindbergh baby was but I haven’t been able to find it on the forum so far. Really it would just give into insight into CAL’s personal life and his experience as a new father raising a son who was cut without his consent. I’m European so am probably in the minority on this one. Are there any past threads or posts where this information could be substantiated? I am not trying to debate the pros and cons either way, I am just strangely curious as to how the Lindbergh’s went about their parenting during the 1930s etc
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Jul 17, 2021 17:49:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jul 18, 2021 17:32:16 GMT -5
Never said on his autopsy. I imaging Charles Lindbergh being born in 1902 to a Swedish immigrant might not have been but I’m wondering in the 1930s they just took the son and cut him without asking the parents? Do we have any evidence to say that CAL jr was snipped? What about his father? Rather than trying to compare Charles Jr. to the body found in the woods on the presence or absence of a circumcision (which is not mentioned in either the Van Ingen letter to Mrs. Morrow describing many features of the living Charlie nor the Mitchell autopsy report), it would be more fruitful to compare KNOWN features of the living Charlie to corresponding features of the corpse. There is a most notable discrepancy between the Van Ingen letter and the Mitchell report regarding the abnormalities of the toes of the right foot, as I have posted several times here in the past. Barring a significant error by either Van Ingen or Mitchell or both, this comparison suggests strongly that the (partial) body found in the woods was that of a child other than Charles Jr.
|
|