Even though circumcision was probably invented as a means to mark the transition to adulthood, and pain was an integral part of the experience, it was never meant to be torture.
One of the most controversial aspects of modern day circumcision practices is that a significant portion of circumcisions in developed countries are performed on newborn babies, and a common objection against it is that circumcision causes a lot of pain to babies. Video evidence circulating on the Internet to support that claim is used as anti-circumcision propaganda.
On the other hand there is also video evidence that a circumcision can be done with adequate anesthesia and minimal discomfort to the patient – even if the patient is a baby.
Back in the less good old days, when people were idiots, they have believed that babies could not feel pain and usually performed all kinds of surgeries on them without anesthetics. But now we know better.
Traditional methods of circumcision, developed centuries before the discovery of anesthetics, were meant to be quick and cause only as much pain as was unavoidable. E.g. Jewish mohels take pride in their ability to perform a circumcision in less then one minute.
A Gomco procedure, on the other hand, has many steps and can take over 15 minutes to perform. It is just way too complicated to do it quickly, and all the steps look very painful, especially since extra cutting is required just to get the bell inside the foreskin. It is often aggravated by some OB-GYN resident performing the procedure who does not really know what he is doing.
Modern surgical techniques were developed with a patient under anesthesia in mind, and probably should only be used that way.
If you would not be willing to endure the same pain yourself as an adult you should not inflict it on a baby. It is just cowardly to do so.
