FAQ: Your Questions, Our Answers

A: That's me, the survey author. I'm an independent Seattle-based researcher and data scientist who, by a conscious choice of my parents, grew up intact in the US—a culture where that's an anomaly.

This experience has given me a lifelong "accidental anthropologist" perspective, leading me to question and study a practice that is often accepted without thought. I explore this unique vantage point and the extensive research it has inspired in my primary work, "The Accidental Intactivist Manifesto: Exposing the Monster We Agree Not to See." published in the spring of 2025.

You can find my ongoing research, articles, and analysis on Substack, the full manifesto on Substack and Medium, and join the community discussion on Reddit.

• Substack (for the full Manifesto and the latest articles & survey updates): The Accidental Intactivist's Guide

• Medium (for the full Manifesto): Read the Manifesto Here

• Reddit (for community discussion): r/FriendsoftheFrenulum

• Email c4charkey@gmail.com

A: This is an independent research project led by "The Accidental Intactivist." Its primary goal is to gather a broad spectrum of anonymous, firsthand experiences to create public educational content for the "Accidental Intactivist's Guide" series (on platforms like Substack/Medium). 

This will include articles, data visualizations, and in-depth analyses. The aggregated, anonymized data will be a resource to support advocacy for bodily autonomy and contribute to a more informed public dialogue. For more detail, see our "About the Project & Methodology" page.

A: The primary audience is the general public, especially expectant parents, young men, and partners who are seeking honest, non-sensationalized information. A secondary audience includes healthcare professionals, educators, advocates, and researchers who can use this data to inform their own work. 

The goal is to create material that is accessible to everyone, from the deeply engaged to the newly curious.

A: Yes, absolutely. A core part of this project has been to understand the full landscape of belief surrounding this topic. "The Accidental Intactivist Manifesto" spends significant time analyzing and debunking the most common pro-circumcision arguments (hygiene, disease prevention, aesthetics), tracing their historical roots. 

This survey is designed to capture the perspectives of those who are satisfied with being circumcised and believe it was beneficial, right alongside those who feel harmed. A true understanding is impossible without engaging with all viewpoints, even those you fundamentally disagree with on ethical grounds.

A: That's a completely fair and important question to ask. Let's break it down.

• Is it biased? Yes, in a way. This survey is conducted from a specific perspective: one that starts with the ethical question of whether a non-consensual, irreversible, and often painful surgical procedure should be routinely performed on healthy children for reasons that are not medically immediate. This perspective values bodily autonomy as a fundamental right.

• Is it propaganda? No. Propaganda typically relies on omitting facts, emotional manipulation, and discouraging critical thought. This project is designed to do the opposite. We are actively seeking all experiences—positive, negative, and neutral—from intact, circumcised, and restoring individuals. The survey's unique structure, which asks about lived sexual experiences before asking about anatomical status, is specifically designed to gather less biased comparative data.

• Why take it seriously? Because it's a genuine inquiry into a "transparent monster"—a practice so normalized, especially in the US, that it's rarely examined with the seriousness it deserves. We are not telling people how to feel. We are creating a platform for them to anonymously share how they actually feel and what they actually experience. 

The goal isn't to create followers, but to foster a more informed public by documenting a wide spectrum of truths, including those from men who are perfectly happy being circumcised. The final data, whatever it reveals, will speak for itself. We believe that an honest look at real-world outcomes is the most powerful tool for understanding, far more so than any pre-packaged agenda.

A: This is an important piece of feedback we've received, and it's something we've taken to heart. The survey author's perspective as an "Accidental Intactivist" is indeed rooted in the US cultural anomaly. However, the survey has been updated to be more globally inclusive based on community input. Changes include:

• • Removing US-centric language (e.g., replacing "born abroad" with neutral cultural context options).

  • Adding options and pathways that acknowledge that for most of the world, being intact is the default, not the exception.

  • Broadening questions about parental decisions to include various cultural and community contexts, not just the medical model.
    Our goal is to accurately capture all experiences, and these revisions help us to ensure the data is more globally representative.

A: This is a crucial question, especially for sensitive topics. As an independent initiative, this project does not have formal Institutional Review Board (IRB) oversight. Recognizing this, we have designed the survey with core ethical principles at the forefront, as outlined in detail on the survey's introduction page and our "About the Project" section. 

These include fully informed consent, absolute anonymity (no IPs or personal data collected with responses), and voluntary participation. We are committed to handling this sensitive data responsibly and respectfully, with the goal of empowering voices, not causing further harm.

A:  Currently, the survey is only available in English. However, a major goal of this project is to translate it into other languages, especially Spanish, French, and German, to gather a more representative global dataset. This is a volunteer-driven effort. 

If you are a fluent speaker and are interested in assisting with translation, please visit our "Get Involved & Support" page!

A: While our brief promotional posts aim for broad reach, the survey itself is highly detailed and specific. We believe that understanding the lived experiences of sensation, physical outcomes, and feelings of loss is crucial for demonstrating the profound need for this conversation. 

The broad data gathered ultimately supports all avenues of healing, reclamation, and informed choice. The survey even includes a dedicated Restoration Pathway with questions about awareness of regeneration research (like Foregen's). 

A: The survey will remain open for an extended period to gather as many responses as possible. Our initial goal is to reach at least 500 participants to ensure a robust dataset for preliminary analysis. We will announce any plans to close the survey well in advance on the "Accidental Intactivist's Guide" Substack.

A: We are committed to contributing to the broader research community. While we will not release the raw open-ended text responses to protect the nuances of individual anonymity, we are exploring ways to responsibly share the fully anonymized quantitative dataset (the multiple-choice and scale answers) with other allied researchers and data scientists upon request, once our initial analysis is complete. Our primary goal for now is to publish our own findings and data visualizations for public education.

A: This is currently an independent research project led by "The Accidental Intactivist." However, we welcome collaboration and signal-boosting from all organizations that support bodily autonomy and informed choice. The goal is to create a resource that can benefit the entire movement. 

If you're interested in contributing to or collaborating on the survey or this work, please visit the Get Involved & Support the Inquiry page

A: This is a valid methodological point. Anonymous online surveys do have inherent limitations, such as self-selection bias and the inability to verify responses. However, their great strength, especially for a topic as personal and often stigmatized as this, is their ability to reach a broad range of individuals who might only feel comfortable sharing candidly under the protection of anonymity. 

The aim is to capture a wide spectrum of self-reported experiences and common themes, which can then inform further discussion and more targeted research (including methods like in-depth, verified interviews for those willing). Both anonymous surveys and personal interviews contribute valuable, though different, pieces to the overall puzzle. 

The goal is to map the spectrum of self-reported experience, which is a valuable dataset in its own right.

A: Great question! We will be creating a clean, downloadable PDF version of the full manifesto. It will be available on the Resources & Downloads page. Thank you for your interest in archiving it!

A: We understand that the survey looks extensive, but it is designed for depth and specificity. We also use branching logic, which means you will only see the sections relevant to your experience based on your answers (e.g., if you're intact, you won't see questions about restoration). This significantly reduces the actual number of questions for most participants. 

We've also made every question optional, so you are always free to skip any that feel too time-consuming or that you don't wish to answer. Your time is valued, and even partial responses are helpful.

A: Absolutely not. Human experience is often complex and contradictory, and we welcome that nuance. This survey is not a test with right or wrong answers. We are interested in your genuine, self-reported experiences and perceptions, even if they feel inconsistent. Your entire response is valuable data.

A: This is a great point, as your experience bridges two categories. Our Recommendation for Most Restorers: Choose the Restoration Pathway. It's designed to capture that entire process, including questions about your feelings and experiences before you started. 

If you also feel you have significant things to say about your experience as a circumcised person before you started restoring, the Restoration Pathway now includes an option to also complete the Circumcised Pathway to provide that full context.

A: This is an excellent question! We've implemented specific guidance for this. For general sensation questions that appear before you enter your specific pathway, please answer based on your current overall sensory experience as someone who is restoring or has restored. 

The dedicated Restoration Pathway itself contains specific questions that will ask you to detail the changes you've experienced over time due to your restoration efforts, including your experiences before and during the process. This ensures your full, evolving experience is accurately captured. 

A: The religion section has been updated to be more inclusive. Now, you can select all religious or cultural traditions that apply to your background or upbringing, providing a more accurate picture for those from mixed-heritage families. 

A: Tes. We are grateful to the community for reporting an early conditional logic error that was causing issues for some users. This has been fully corrected, and the survey now provides a smooth and accurate user experience. 

If you encounter any other technical problems, please report them directly to c4charkey@gmail.com.

A:  Unfortunately, in the interest of ensuring robust anonymity, Google Forms does not allow us to enable the 'save and continue later' feature which requires user sign-in. We recommend setting aside 15-60 minutes to complete it in one sitting. We appreciate you taking the time!

A: Stay up to date with the "Accidental Intactivist's Guide" on Substack https://substack.com/@theaccidentalintactivist. We will be publishing preliminary findings, deep-dive analyses, and eventually a comprehensive report there.

A: That's a valid and common perspective. Many people are perfectly content. This inquiry isn't meant to invalidate your personal experience. Rather, it aims to explore the full spectrum of outcomes; physical, sexual, and psychological; and to question the ethical basis of performing a non-consensual, irreversible surgery on a child who cannot consent, especially when outcomes and experiences vary so widely.

A: The purported health benefits of routine infant circumcision are highly contested and, in many cases, have been debunked or found to be statistically insignificant when weighed against the risks. Major medical bodies around the world (outside the US) do not recommend it. 

The "hygiene" argument, for instance, is often seen as a relic from an era before modern plumbing; simple, normal washing is sufficient for an intact penis, just as it is for any other body part. My manifesto explores the history of these shifting justifications in depth.

A: This is a crucial point, and it's important to distinguish between different contexts.

Adult vs. Infant Circumcision: An adult making an informed, consensual decision about their own body is exercising their bodily autonomy. That is fundamentally different from a non-consensual, non-therapeutic procedure performed on a healthy infant who has no say in the matter. 

Our survey and advocacy focus primarily on the ethics of the latter. We welcome and value the perspectives of those circumcised as adults, as their experience—including their motivations and outcomes—is an important part of the overall picture.

A: Absolutely not. This inquiry is a critique of a procedure, not a faith. This survey was developed with direct input from and contains specific pathways for members of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic communities to ensure their perspectives are represented accurately and respectfully.

Many people within these faiths are also questioning the practice and exploring alternatives that honor both tradition and bodily integrity. This is a universal children's rights issue.

A: This is a complex and highly debated topic. While some studies in specific, high-HIV-prevalence regions of Africa showed a relative risk reduction, these findings are intensely criticized for several reasons. Key issues include methodological flaws, the vast difference between relative and absolute risk (which is often very small), and significant ethical concerns about the quality of consent in trial settings. Crucially, extrapolating data from consenting adults in high-risk environments to justify the non-consensual circumcision of infants in low-risk countries like the US is a major scientific and ethical leap that many medical bodies worldwide reject. 

My manifesto delves into the specifics of why the VMMC argument is a poor justification for routine infant circumcision. 

A: That's a key observation. There is no single, universally agreed-upon standard for what a "correct" circumcision looks like. Different practitioners use different clamping devices (like the Gomco, Mogen, or Plastibell) or freehand techniques, and they make individual judgments about how much skin to remove. 

This leads to a huge variation in outcomes—what I call the "aesthetic lottery"—regarding scar placement, tightness, and the amount of mobile skin left. This lack of standardization is one of the often-overlooked risks of the procedure. 

A: Foreskin restoration is a process where individuals use non-surgical methods (like manual stretching or specialized devices) to gradually expand their existing skin to create a new foreskin-like covering for the glans. 

Many restorers report significant improvements in sensitivity, sexual function, and psychological well-being. While it cannot regenerate the specific nerve endings that were removed, it can restore gliding motion and glans coverage. Our survey has a dedicated pathway to capture the experiences of those on this journey.

A: The physical and emotional state of a partner directly impacts intimacy. Understanding their anatomy, potential sensory differences, or any psychological baggage related to their circumcision can lead to better communication, empathy, and a more connected sexual experience. It's also a fundamental issue of children's rights and bodily autonomy, which affects everyone.

A: Yes. Absolutely. This survey was created with the understanding that for many, this is not a neutral topic but a source of deep pain, anger, and trauma. The anonymous open-ended questions are designed to be a space where you can articulate those feelings without judgment. 

Your raw, honest experience is a vital part of the truth we are seeking to document. Please know that your story matters and is treated with respect.

A: Yes, absolutely. Your perspective is incredibly important and welcome. The "Observer, Partner & Ally Pathway" has questions specifically for parents to reflect on their decision-making process. 

The survey is a judgment-free zone designed to understand all experiences, including the difficult emotions of parental regret. Sharing your story can help other parents navigate this complex choice with more information and awareness.

A: This is an incredibly important point. Our goal is to critique a cultural and medical system, not to shame individual parents who often made decisions based on limited, biased, or incomplete information provided by trusted authorities. In fact, our preliminary data shows that systemic pressures—like institutional medical norms and a lack of counter-information—are seen as the primary drivers of this choice. 

Our analysis will focus on these systemic failures to empower future parents with better information, not to condemn past ones.

This sentiment is at the very core of why "The Accidental Intactivist's Inquiry" exists. Too many personal stories about male genital anatomy, pleasure, and the impact of circumcision are dismissed, silenced, or ignored. 

This survey is designed to provide a structured, respectful, and anonymous platform for people to share those candid experiences. Your voice is invaluable, and we are committed to amplifying these often-unheard truths.