Cut to be a man
Around nine in ten Filipino boys are circumcised — and almost none of it is for a medical or religious reason. So why? The honest answer, in the boys' own words, is fear: the fear of being called "supot", of being seen as less than a man. This is a decision driven by masculinity culture, not medicine.
When Filipino boys are asked why they were circumcised, the reasons they give are overwhelmingly social — not medical. In one community study, the most-cited reasons were [142]:
66.7%
Not wanting to be called "supot" (uncircumcised)
41.2%
"Being the right age"
29.8%
Belief it helps you "grow tall and physically fit"
In a separate cohort of 1,577 boys, social and peer pressure was the dominant motive — 60% of the medically circumcised group — while only 17.8% cited any medical or health reason at all [53]. None of these is a medical indication. They are reasons of belonging and fear.
"Supot": when an insult becomes surgery
A single word does an enormous amount of the coercive work.
The Tagalog word "supot" — uncircumcised — is not neutral. As Professor Romeo Lee of De La Salle University described it, the term "implies that one is different and a coward… for lacking the courage to experience the pain and anxiety" [99]. An uncircumcised boy is not simply unusual; he is framed as a coward. That is a heavy thing to hang on a child, and it is exactly the weight that pushes boys — and their parents — toward the knife.
This is what we mean by a toxic masculinity culture: not that Filipino men or families are bad, but that "being a man" has been defined so narrowly, and policed so harshly, that an irreversible surgery on a child becomes the price of avoiding ridicule. The pressure is the mechanism.
"To be called a man"
Tuli framed as the rite of passage into manhood.
Tuli is widely understood as a rite of passage. The medical literature describes it as "deeply tied to masculine identity" [54], and a 2018 American Urological Association presentation — "Tuli: A Rite of Passage for Filipino Boys" — noted it "is believed that it helps to achieve masculinity" [134].
"To get circumcised is probably the essence of being a man… for boys, circumcision is necessary to be called a man." — a Filipino mother, after her 11-year-old's procedure (AFP) [99]
The boy in that story had been told he must be cut to "grow taller and become a real man." The pressure is transmitted by everyone around the child — parents, relatives, classmates — which is what makes it so hard for any individual boy to refuse.
Hearsay, not health knowledge
When the decision is cultural, the "reasons" attached to it are folklore.
Because tuli is a social decision, the justifications people give for it are often folk beliefs rather than facts. The belief that circumcision helps a boy "grow tall and physically fit" — cited by nearly a third of boys [142] — has no medical basis whatsoever. These ideas are passed along by community and gossip, and they thrive precisely where frank sexual-health education is thin. The decision is made by peers and family first, and justified with whatever folklore is at hand afterward.
This matters because it inverts how a medical decision is supposed to work. Instead of evidence leading to a choice, a choice that is socially mandatory recruits whatever "evidence" supports it. That is the opposite of informed consent.
What the developed world concluded
The contrast the masculinity argument never hears.
Here is the part that rarely reaches the boys under pressure. Every national medical body that has formally studied non-therapeutic circumcision — except those in the United States — has concluded it cannot be justified on medical grounds [143]. The Royal Dutch Medical Association states there is "no convincing evidence that circumcision is useful or necessary in terms of prevention or hygiene," and that it "conflicts with the child's right to autonomy and physical integrity" [48]. The Australasian and British medical associations likewise do not recommend routine non-therapeutic circumcision.
| Country | Male circumcision rate |
|---|---|
| 🇵🇭 Philippines | ~91.7% |
| 🇬🇧 United Kingdom | ~20.7% |
| 🇩🇰 Denmark | 5.3% |
| 🇬🇷 Greece | 4.7% |
Source: Morris et al. (2016), modelled estimates [115]. Routine circumcision has also collapsed historically wherever it was once common — the UK fell from 35% in the 1930s to under 4% of newborns by 2000; Australia from 90% in 1955 to 12% by 2000. In those societies, removing healthy genital tissue from a boy who cannot consent, to satisfy a social ideal, is increasingly seen not as proof of manhood but as a violation of his body. The masculinity rationale, in short, is a cultural pressure that overrides the medical evidence rather than reflecting it.
The honest bottom line
None of this is an attack on Filipino men, or on parents who love their sons. Families face sincere, intense pressure, and wanting to spare a boy from ridicule is human. But naming the mechanism matters: a healthy child is having an irreversible part of his body removed, at an age when he cannot meaningfully consent, primarily so that he will not be called a coward. That is a definition of manhood imposed by fear — and looking at the same evidence, the rest of the developed world has quietly walked away from it. Real courage might be letting a boy keep his own body, and decide for himself.
Sources
- 53Boyle & Ramos, Ann. Med. Surg. 2019Motivations cohort: 60% peer pressure vs 17.8% medical (1,577 boys)
- 142Lee, Sex. Transm. Infect. 2005Community study: "supot" 66.7%, "grow tall" 29.8% (n=114)
- 54Lee, Culture, Health & Sexuality 2006Tuli bound to masculine identity & community
- 99AFP / Jakarta Post 2019"Circumcision season": supot = coward; ~90% non-religious
- 134AUA, J. Urol. 2018"Tuli: A Rite of Passage"; manunuli; ages 8–12
- 115Morris et al., Popul. Health Metr. 2016Prevalence: PH 91.7%, Greece 4.7%, Denmark 5.3%
- 48KNMG (Royal Dutch Medical Assoc.) 2010No convincing evidence; conflicts with autonomy & integrity
- 143Lempert, Chegwidden, Steinfeld & Earp, Clinical Ethics 2023Every medical body except US: not justifiable medically
Numbered references map to the references library. Motivation percentages are single-study findings on non-representative samples — cited as study findings, not national rates; the direction (social pressure ≫ medical need) is corroborated across all of them. This page does not use the same cohort's contested PTSD-prevalence figure.