# Circumcision



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

This was transferred from a discussion of tail docking and ear cropping in the pet forum.



Pugnacious said:


> Why? Because the opinion of a faceless poster on a homesteading website should be valued more than the opinion of ones own pediatritian on the subject? :umno:


Pug, if your pediatrician follows the advice of the American Academy of Pediatrics, he would recommend against circumcision for medical reasons except in some very unusual cases. The AAP has decided there are not sufficient medical benefits to merit widespread surgical penile mutilation. Whoops, I guess I just gave away my position on this issue.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

I agree with you and I have argued this before on several threads. There is no good excuse for the widespread mutilation of baby girls *or* boys. If they grow up and decide they want a fashionable penis that looks just like Daddy's, fine, they can have it done as consenting adults. 

And HPV? I cannot believe that parents would rather cut off one of the most sensitive parts of their baby's body, permanently and irretrievably, than to have him get the Gardasil vacccine when he's older.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

3 cheers for foreskin! Hurrah!

(couldn't help it)


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Male children with challenges are a group for which there is a change in the standing for circumcision. As a result of a study it was found that a very high percentage of such child DID in fact suffer from this true medical thing --started with a P. The foreskin encapsulates the tip and it is major. No one talks about it. It is private but having to be with my teen son having to be circumcised at that age was hard and embarrassing. Now, they are checking on this children who where not as babies and it is now part of a FAS normal yearly physical to deal with it sooner to prevent the from "missing out" on life. I see nothing wrong with it and it is a private choice. Hey I am pro choice.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

Have been through this before; and I'm sure I'll get castigated for it, but I figured I'd present my side.

I did research on the subject, and discovered (essentially) that while the pros included decreased possibility of certain maladies (such as a decreased likelihood of contracting the human papilloma virus), or penile cancer, etc.), the cons almost overwhelmingly include 'fear of' this or that, or psychological feelings of inadequacy, etc. The two best arguments against it are:

- decreased stimulation in the affected area. This to be truthful has been proven. This being said, I can't really comment on that either way, other than to say I think I'm doing alright. 

- possible complications. There are DEFINITELY those who have had terrible experiences with circumcisions; people who had botched jobs, bled out, etc. So I researched the instances of this, and found it pretty astronomically low.

When it comes down to it, I think it should be left up to personal preference, unless/until it's proven that it's doing more harm than good across the board. ALTHOUGH I will say that if one is going to circumcise a child, it probably SHOULD be done on the 8th day. It's got nothing to do with religion, though I'm a Christian; it's got to do with the fact that there's only ONE time in a person's entire life where their body's production of prothrombin (which contributes to clotting) is at its all-time lifetime high, and that's on the 8th day of one's life.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

I'm glad mine is gone, if mine were any more sensitive I don't think I could go out in public....................


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Ironic, since in Africa there is a big public health initiative for adult male circumcision because circumcised males are much less likely to contract the HIV virus.

Who is to say that the AIDS epidemic wouldn't be much worse here if the majority of males were not circumcised?


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

tinknal said:


> Ironic, since in Africa there is a big public health initiative for adult male circumcision because circumcised males are much less likely to contract the HIV virus.
> 
> Who is to say that the AIDS epidemic wouldn't be much worse here if the majority of males were not circumcised?


Thats why my kids are taught how to properly put on a condom, and that they should wait until they are mature enough to understand the potential ramifications of sex.

They got my foreskin but they ain't getting my boys...:banana:


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

fishinshawn said:


> Thats why my kids are taught how to properly put on a condom, and that they should wait until they are mature enough to understand the potential ramifications of sex.
> 
> They got my foreskin but they ain't getting my boys...:banana:


I think the key phrase inn this post is _*should*_.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

fishinshawn said:


> They got my foreskin but they ain't getting my boys...:banana:


Who is "they"?


----------



## stamphappy (Jul 29, 2010)

tinknal said:


> I'm glad mine is gone, if mine were any more sensitive I don't think I could go out in public....................


Goodness, I was just thinking the same thing about my husband!


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Kung said:


> Have been through this before; and I'm sure I'll get castigated for it, but I figured I'd present my side.
> 
> I did research on the subject, and discovered (essentially) that while the pros included decreased possibility of certain maladies (such as a decreased likelihood of contracting the human papilloma virus), or penile cancer, etc.), the cons almost overwhelmingly include 'fear of' this or that, or psychological feelings of inadequacy, etc. The two best arguments against it are:
> 
> ...


That's interesting, but doesn't surprise me. God has a reason for everything He has asked people to do.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Well, my DS was circumsized before we got him, but I had my birthsons circumsized. To be honest, I don't even remember if I was asked about it. I also find the post by Kung to clear up the matter in my mind.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Kung said:


> Have been through this before; and I'm sure I'll get castigated for it, but I figured I'd present my side.
> 
> I did research on the subject, and discovered (essentially) that while the pros included decreased possibility of certain maladies (such as a decreased likelihood of contracting the human papilloma virus), or penile cancer, etc.), the cons almost overwhelmingly include 'fear of' this or that, or psychological feelings of inadequacy, etc. The two best arguments against it are:
> 
> ...


There is a third benefit: The women who make love to uncut men are far more likely to enjoy the experience than women whose men have been mutilated. 

And, men who are left natural do not have to constantly, daily be confronted by the evidence of what was done to their penis when they were small and defenseless. I can't even imagine what that would be like.


----------



## livinzoo (Aug 29, 2007)

This is something I feel strongly about. Boys and girls should be left alone. If at 18, as an adult, they want cut so be it. 

There are more boys under 1 that die each year as a result of problems related to circumcisions than those that die in automobile accidents. The problem is the medical establishment does not write them down as "hemorrhage due to circ" They just say hemorrhage. 

Did you know the hospital sells each foreskin for $250. They make money off it. I wonder if the big push for Africa to circ is based off the fact that the US circ rates have fallen and there are not as many foreskins available. As far as a natural penis being more sensitive, its like a hand that is kept in a glove all the time. It isn't calloused therefore when removed from the glove it is soft and has more sensation. But when you are out in public the glove is on and it is less sensitive. A circed penis is more sensitive when you were out in public.

Kellogg's (same family that started the cereal company) encouraged circ without anesthesia to prevent masturbation. For a full history of circ look here: History of Circumcision

As far as phimosis. It is very over diagnosed in the US, as here a circed penis is the norm. Most drs do not know proper care of an intact penis. They will try to retract and even encourage parents to retract "to clean". True proper care is you clean it like a finger. You do not rip the nail up to clean under it just like you don't retract. Less than 50% of 2 year old boys are retractable. Some don't retract until puberty. Retracting a penis before it is ready causes scar tissue to form and that usually leads to problems that circ is recomended for.

Many parents that have circumcised children defend it because they would have to admit they did wrong. Some parents circ their first son and at some point stop and leave other sons intact.

Truthfully my husband wishes he had his foreskin, and he plans on restoring it. It won't restore all the features of an intact penis, but it will stretch the skin to allow the head to be covered and become softer again.


----------



## CJBegins (Nov 20, 2009)

I am one of the Mom's that felt all kinds of pressure from everyone to have my first born son circ'd. I so didn't want to do it, everything in me said it was wrong. Hubby wanted it done so we did it. It totally changed him at his sweet age of 8 days old. I vowed to never, ever do that again. My other sons weren't circ'd and there have been many conversations about it. 
My oldest son is now a father. He has chosen to circ his son. I really don't think they really gave it much thought. His brothers were really angry that he did it. Interesting dynamics.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

chamoisee said:


> There is a third benefit: The women who make love to uncut men are far more likely to enjoy the experience than women whose men have been mutilated.


 Doesn't seem to be a problem around here.

And, men who are left natural do not have to constantly, daily be confronted by the evidence of what was done to their penis when they were small and defenseless. I can't even imagine what that would be like. [/QUOTE]
Seriously? Now _that_ is funny! I'm quite happy with the appearance. Hard to be reminded off something one cannot remember.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

livinzoo said:


> This is something I feel strongly about. Boys and girls should be left alone. If at 18, as an adult, they want cut so be it.
> 
> There are more boys under 1 that die each year as a result of problems related to circumcisions than those that die in automobile accidents. The problem is the medical establishment does not write them down as "hemorrhage due to circ" They just say hemorrhage.
> 
> ...


The questionable information inn this post is breathtaking. Please provide unbiased information for this batch of hooey.


Calloused? Is the old man wearing burlap undies or is there a dryness problem?


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

chamoisee said:


> There is a third benefit: The women who make love to uncut men are far more likely to enjoy the experience than women whose men have been mutilated.
> 
> And, men who are left natural do not have to constantly, daily be confronted by the evidence of what was done to their penis when they were small and defenseless. I can't even imagine what that would be like.


That, to me, falls into the whole 'psychological' category, as well as the 'opinion' category. Without going into detail, suffice to say that there's not a lot of 'constant, daily' wailing and gnashing of teeth going on for either myself or my wife.  My wife agrees....and as a nurse, she assures me that her opinion on circumcision DOES include her professional experience.

NOW....all of this being said, are those who choose NOT to have it done wrong? Of course not. But one thing I would caution people against is jumping to wholesale conclusions on circumcision; as a nurse of about 12 years, she has seen more than a few problems in the hospital that necessitated circumcision to correct the problem. Not exactly all circumcisions are done by religious parents standing around laughing maniacally as their 'poor defenseless' child undergoes it.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

livinzoo said:


> This is something I feel strongly about. Boys and girls should be left alone. If at 18, as an adult, they want cut so be it.


While I'm sure you know this, I DO want to point out that having to have a possible adult circumcision isn't something that someone 'just goes out and does.' I know two people who have had one as an adult...and both of them assure me that it is by FAR the most excruciating surgery they have EVER had.


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

I wish I hadn't been due to sensitive skin issues. My son hasn't. Entirely his decision.


----------



## livinzoo (Aug 29, 2007)

Kung said:


> While I'm sure you know this, I DO want to point out that having to have a possible adult circumcision isn't something that someone 'just goes out and does.' I know two people who have had one as an adult...and both of them assure me that it is by FAR the most excruciating surgery they have EVER had.


And do you not think babies feel pain? Especially when it is an open wound constantly getting soiled with urine and feces? And without being given medication to manage the pain? Could you imagine how bad the pain would be if they did Adult circs the same way they do infant ones and required that the adult wear a diaper and use it and didn't provide proper pain management?


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Kung said:


> While I'm sure you know this, I DO want to point out that having to have a possible adult circumcision isn't something that someone 'just goes out and does.' I know two people who have had one as an adult...and both of them assure me that it is by FAR the most excruciating surgery they have EVER had.


It is excruciating to newborns as well. And it is often done without any pain medication to an infant that is physically restrained. 

I guess it's obvious that I feel strongly about this subject. I came to the conclusion with my sons that whacking off the end of their penis is a poor way to welcome a baby into the world. When they got old enough to notice that sometimes other boys' parts looked different, I told them why. They were horrified and thanked me profusely for leaving theirs alone.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

peaceful parenting: Effects of Male Circumcision on Female Arousal and Orgasm


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

tinknal said:


> Seriously? Now _that_ is funny! I'm quite happy with the appearance. Hard to be reminded off something one cannot remember.


I don't think it's funny, and I don't even have a penis. If someone had cut off my nipples as an infant in an effort to prevent cracked nipples or milk duct infections and I saw a scar on my breasts every time I looked down, I might try to laugh it off, but how on earth could I ever forget it had been done to me? Probably I would waste a lot of time justifying why it wasn't a big deal and say that my nipple-less breasts were just as good or better than the regular kind and more modest, too!


----------



## SageLady (Jun 10, 2008)

chamoisee said:


> There is a third benefit: The women who make love to uncut men are far more likely to enjoy the experience than women whose men have been mutilated.
> 
> And, men who are left natural do not have to constantly, daily be confronted by the evidence of what was done to their penis when they were small and defenseless. I can't even imagine what that would be like.


Ok, to be perfectly blunt, my DH makes me "very happy" in spite of his "mutilation". 

And I personally don't care for the looks of an uncut penis. So there you go! :teehee: 

My DH is also quite happy that he was circumcised. He remembers the many infections his uncircumcised invalid father suffered. His Dad made sure that my DH, his son, was circumcised so he would never have to deal with the pain he did.

Circumcision rocks in my book! :rock:


----------



## HOTW (Jul 3, 2007)

tinknal said:


> Calloused? Is the old man wearing burlap undies or is there a dryness problem?


keratinization of the glans is a known side effect of circumcision. The glans does if to toughen uphe skin to protect the sensitive glans but in doing so it removes some sensation.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

I see a lot of people here who have been cut, or who are married to men who are cut, making statements about how a natural penis is bad or no different.

I wonder how many women have actually been with a man who was natural, and how many men here who are natural are wishing that part of their penis was removed?

Speaking from _actual experience_, I can say _there is a difference _in a natural penis, and it is a positive one for both the male and the female.

Not too long ago I had a debate with a European friend who was amazed that most US men were circumsized. He swore up and down that only Jews and Muslims practiced this. Most European men outside the USA actually view it as an outdated, barbaric biblical procedure, practiced by pockets of certain religious groups.

That being said. If you are cut, you probably won't miss something you never experienced.


----------



## DavidUnderwood (Jul 5, 2007)

I'm glad I'm cut. My wife is happy with it too.
I've had a couple of friends who had trouble
with their foreskin.
No way in heck I'd do it as an adult.
And who says there is no pain management?
I have a baby grandson, and I can say I know
better than that.
People should mind there own buisness.


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

I believe babies have a lot less nerve endings in some parts of their bodies, thus making this procedure done at birth potentially far less painful then it would be for adults. Correct me if I'm wrong, far from being a doctor.
That being said, my father had this done when he was 12. He strongly advised that it be done at birth because he didn't want any of his sons, or grandsons to have to go through the horrible pain he did. 
Mutilated???? well holy smokes, never once have I looked down and felt I had been mutilated.


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

SageLady said:


> Ok, to be perfectly blunt, my DH makes me "very happy" in spite of his "mutilation".
> 
> And I personally don't care for the looks of an uncut penis. So there you go! :teehee:
> 
> ...


Never thought this subject would stir up controversy on HT. 

I can't begin to count the many times I've sat and longed for my mutilation to NOT be! :shrug: (I wanted to use free ice cream smiley here but ... :nono:

Looking from the other side of defense, it seems like the standard issue, would be a hygiene issue. Never gonna be able to be sure, I guess.

The "mutilated" area, kept in vaseline was not soiled, and he got over it. 

Not sure how mutilating nipples popped into this.

I am not condemning those who did not get trimmed!


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Rick said:


> Not sure how mutilating nipples popped into this.


They "popped into this" as a poor and fatally flawed analogy from someone desperately grasping at straws.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

chamoisee said:


> There is a third benefit: The women who make love to uncut men are far more likely to enjoy the experience than women whose men have been mutilated.
> 
> And, men who are left natural do not have to constantly, daily be confronted by the evidence of what was done to their penis when they were small and defenseless. I can't even imagine what that would be like.


This instantly reminded me of a quote, I always found quite profound.:whistlin:

"We didn't even know, we were poor, until everybody else, told us we were."

I still have the hospital bill, from my birth in 1959 (I was not the one who paid it). $98 for delivery and $4 for circumcision. 

Not for one second during my life, have I ever felt "mutiliated" or even wished I was still "intact". If there was every any _dissatisfaction_, in the bedroom, it was certainly not from having, or not having a small piece of skin.

But, now I've got something else to have anexiety over. :grit:


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

plowjockey said:


> This instantly reminded me of a quote, I always found quite profound.:whistlin:
> 
> "We didn't even know, we were poor, until everybody else, told us we were."
> 
> ...


Oh no!! Thanks Plowjockey. I must have Foreskin Envy and don't even know it. Please don't tell the Mrs. of 38 years. We ain't never known nobody but eachother, hee hee.


----------



## livinzoo (Aug 29, 2007)

DavidUnderwood said:


> I'm glad I'm cut. My wife is happy with it too.
> I've had a couple of friends who had trouble
> with their foreskin.
> No way in heck I'd do it as an adult.
> ...


Can you tell me what pain management they use? For years this was done without any pain management at all. Some hospitals now use sugar water, some use what is called a penile block, and some use a numbing gel. Sugar water doesn't do anything. The penile block, when done properly which many don't, can help with the pain of the procedure but not the after pains. The same with the numbing gel. I have never seen anything prescribed for the after pain. 



jaredI said:


> I believe babies have a lot less nerve endings in some parts of their bodies, thus making this procedure done at birth potentially far less painful then it would be for adults. Correct me if I'm wrong, far from being a doctor.
> That being said, my father had this done when he was 12. He strongly advised that it be done at birth because he didn't want any of his sons, or grandsons to have to go through the horrible pain he did.
> Mutilated???? well holy smokes, never once have I looked down and felt I had been mutilated.


Read this and tell me if newborns feel pain. Infant Responses to Circumcision

Or better yet watch a video

There is also this Pain of circumcision, pain control
Can you believe up to 1987 they still preformed open heart surgery on infants without ANY pain medications! They just used a chemical to paralyze them.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Zoo, I have 2 sons who were both circumcised. Neither one showed any discomfort during the recovery, even while applying salve to the scar.


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

Livingzoo, I never said they don't feel pain. I simply stated I believe the pain is far less for a baby then an older person. Personally speaking, I don't remember the procedure, come to think of it, I don't remember much of anything prior to about age 5.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

tinknal said:


> They "popped into this" as a poor and fatally flawed analogy from someone desperately grasping at straws.


Actually, there are African cultures where girl's breasts are ironed. IPS Inter Press Service &#8211; Telling Africa


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

chamoisee said:


> Actually, there are African cultures where girl's breasts are ironed. IPS Inter Press Service â Telling Africa


Still a flawed analogy. 

Male circumcision addresses several valid health concerns. Female circumcision and breast ironing do not.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

The health concerns you cite are "valid" in a culture where dry sex and female circumcision are practiced. Most of us do not practice dry sex or female circumcision, so there is less abrasion of the female organs, hence less risk of transmission of blood borne diseases. 

I am sure that people who practice female circumcision and breast ironing have all sorts of supposedly valid health reasons for that, too. None of this justifies cutting off part of an infant's body without his consent.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Just think of how much breast cancer could be eradicated if we simply did mastectomies on all newborn baby girls!


----------



## HeelSpur (May 7, 2011)

tinknal said:


> Calloused? Is the old man wearing burlap undies or is there a dryness problem?


:hysterical:

must be driving fence posts with it.

ole lady said, bagbaum that puppy.:shocked:


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

chamoisee said:


> The health concerns you cite are "valid" in a culture where dry sex and female circumcision are practiced.


What does female circumcision have to do with disease transmission?

You are just ranting now. Knock it off. You look silly.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

My husband is a natural man, fully intact. It was with a great deal of embarrassment he told me and was so very shy about my reaction when we began dating. I was thrilled to find a man like that, my big smile truly took him by surprise. I know the difference where others don't. Men back then were made to feel "different" in school because they were not circumcised. Hubby told me about the showers in school where he did his best to conceal this. My husband actually offered to go in and be circumcised if I wanted him to! Imagine his relief when I told him that there was no way on earth I would ask him to! 

When I had my first son, hubby told me it was my choice! I told him absolutely not. I told him that in my own perspective, after being with him for over 10 years, I felt it was my son's choice if he wanted that part of his body altered. When my second son was born, I was told he was going in for the procedure by a nurse quite casually and was not even asked. I angrily told them to bring my son into my room immediately and straightened them out. They tried to convince me to have the procedure done anyway and I told them it was my right to refuse it. 

I feel women should never be circumcised either and yes, although the procedure is different, both procedures remove skin in a personal area of their body which forever changes it. For the woman it is more brutal as they remove more than skin. IN both procedures, rarely is any anesthesia given and the babies are held down just as the young girls are. This is a frightening way to circumcise a person and if they wish to continue this procedure on young baby boys, at the very least they should provide anesthesia. For anyone who doubts this, go watch a male circumcision video online...it is extremely painful and it does not need to be if this is what is decided.

Men who have been circumcised do not and will not know the difference. They should feel perfectly comfortable about themselves as should men who were not circumcised. 

This said, now what does a man lose when they remove that piece of skin? This is more clinical but I can assure you it is true. 

From 10,000 to 20,000 nerve endings are lost from the removal of the foreskin, blood vessels, lubrication loss, a natural protection for the head of the penis, a stimulating and lubricating piece that moves more gently during intercourse. Length is affected as the additional skin allows for more growth, however this is slight in most men unless too much skin is removed. 

As for the issues associated with men who are not circumcised. My husband has no issues, my sons have no significant issues at all. They do not feel any different then their friends, which now a days more and more are not circumcised either. 

I surely will not tell anyone to do this or not do it... I am totally against it and stepped in to assist my daughter's decision with my Grandson by providing info. She thanks me to this day as she was not comfortable with it and was being pushed into it. This is a decision folks should make according to their own views.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

You know what's weird? On this thread, it seems to be mostly women who are all up in arms about it.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

thermopkt said:


> You know what's weird? On this thread, it seems to be mostly women who are all up in arms about it.


Yeah, it's a control thing.................


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

tinknal said:


> Yeah, it's a control thing.................


There are no more valid health concerns. There is NO reason, other then your own personal wishes, for a circumcision these days. Like I said earlier I was, but when I had my kids I looked at the real facts of the matter before I decided to cut off a part of my kids body. 

Your completely diluting yourself if you think it is not incredibly painful. 

From talking to other dads and doctors there are more new babies who don't get it then do.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

thermopkt said:


> You know what's weird? On this thread, it seems to be mostly women who are all up in arms about it.


Perhaps it has to do with women perhaps being more comfortable with this discussion. It is not a lady's body we are discussing but a man's. This is not an easy topic for a man who might be shy about not being circumcised and does not want to say he isn't or a man who is uncomfortable about saying he is! Some men will not even put their opinions into print on a website...it is that personal...


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

romysbaskets said:


> Perhaps it has to do with women perhaps being more comfortable with this discussion. It is not a lady's body we are discussing but a man's. This is not an easy topic for a man who might be shy about not being circumcised and does not want to say he isn't or a man who is uncomfortable about saying he is! Some men will not even put their opinions into print on a website...it is that personal...


No, it's more a matter of men respecting others choices (generally) while the women who are opposed to it are (in general) raging crusaders bent on imposing their will upon others.


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

tinknal said:


> No, it's more a matter of men respecting others choices (generally) while the women who are opposed to it are (in general) raging crusaders bent on imposing their will upon others.


I think woman see the issue much better then many men do. Men, such as yourself, seem to need their kids penis to look just like your own, thus you continue the old tradition. While online it isn't often as noticeable but men generally have issues surrounding our man hood, while woman do not, therefore they can mostly comment much more openly and honestly about this subject. 

If it were simply a matter of choice, you'd wait and let the kid decide to do it or not. You take that choice away from them by doing it at a time when the kid isn't old enough to say yes or no. 

If you want to get your kids clipped that's within your parental rights. Be a man about it though and say your doing it out of tradition, and don't try and hide behind false medical arguments. :happy2:


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

thermopkt said:


> You know what's weird? On this thread, it seems to be mostly women who are all up in arms about it.


A male started the thread. And I am as up in arms about it as I would be if you told me you wanted to put those big holes in your infant's ear lobes because you thought they looked cool or thought god wanted you to or because you thought it would help prevent ear lobe cancer.

I've got no problem with adults getting big ear lobe holes except that I think it is stupid and ugly. I have no problem with adults getting circed and i don't think it is either stupid or ugly. But I would get up in arms if someone was trying to force an adult or child into it.

In this and the dog tail docking thread there seemed to be a desire that the anti-circ crowd shut up and "mind their own business." It does seem odd that the pro-circ crowd gets so defensive about the issue.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

fishinshawn said:


> I think woman see the issue much better then many men do. Men, such as yourself, seem to need their kids penis to look just like your own, thus you continue the old tradition.


It is the height of arrogance and hubris to make such an assumption. Another crusader to ignore. LOL!


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

fishinshawn said:


> There are no more valid health concerns. There is NO reason, other then your own personal wishes, for a circumcision these days. Like I said earlier I was, but when I had my kids I looked at the real facts of the matter before I decided to cut off a part of my kids body.
> 
> Your completely diluting yourself if you think it is not incredibly painful.
> 
> From talking to other dads and doctors there are more new babies who don't get it then do.


BS
it has been positively & repeatedly proven that circumsized men have a dramatically reduced incidence of contracting STDs.
why don't you just admit you're opposed to it because of emotional issues completely unrelated to medical science.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

CesumPec said:


> A male started the thread. And I am as up in arms about it as I would be if you told me you wanted to put those big holes in your infant's ear lobes because you thought they looked cool or thought god wanted you to or because you thought it would help prevent ear lobe cancer.
> 
> I've got no problem with adults getting big ear lobe holes except that I think it is stupid and ugly. I have no problem with adults getting circed and i don't think it is either stupid or ugly. But I would get up in arms if someone was trying to force an adult or child into it.
> 
> In this and the dog tail docking thread there seemed to be a desire that the anti-circ crowd shut up and "mind their own business." It does seem odd that the pro-circ crowd gets so defensive about the issue.


I said mostly women, not only women. I didn't read the tail docking thread, so can't say, but on this one, most of the pro circ seemed kinda good humored about it all til a couple of the non circ people got rather accusatory.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

thermopkt said:


> I said mostly women, not only women. I didn't read the tail docking thread, so can't say, but on this one, most of the pro circ seemed kinda good humored about it all til a couple of the non circ people got rather accusatory.


not to mention making wild leaps of psychoanalysis w/o actually knowing the people they're willfully offending.


----------



## katydidagain (Jun 11, 2004)

I had DS circed 26.5 years ago. Why? Because my EX was. My father wasn't; he'd told me about his mother explaining extra cleaning to him (yeah, weird, I know) so I had a little clue about the issues. Plus I had a Jewish OB-GYN named Craig Dickman who made the cut. Come on, wouldn't you even if you were living in a very "hippy" area just out of DC that didn't support mutilation? (DS had blood compatibility issues--he's A+ and I'm O+ (huh?) so they put it off 1 1/2 days--partly to keep me in the hospital--I was dressed 6 hours after a C section and leaving but couldn't without him and they didn't think I should go home that soon.)

Cut to the chase...when DS was around 12 or so he actually thanked me for having it done. "Mom, some of those guys in the shower look really weird; I'm so glad I don't." 

Vindicated.


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

I'm curious if any of the "natural" males viewing this thread had any difficulty staying clean with no water to spare in a war zone.

I just asked my Marine son about it, in a mesage. I also asked him if he ever regretted being snipped, and his intention with a newborn son.


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

Pops2 said:


> BS
> it has been positively & repeatedly proven that circumsized men have a dramatically reduced incidence of contracting STDs.
> why don't you just admit you're opposed to it because of emotional issues completely unrelated to medical science.


No, that was disproven years ago, your still operating on fake 1950's science.


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

tinknal said:


> It is the height of arrogance and hubris to make such an assumption. Another crusader to ignore. LOL!


That is not accurate in the least. Your either ignorant or lying.


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

chamoisee said:


> ... None of this justifies cutting off part of an infant's body without his consent.


 Sure it does. As parents it is our choice, whether religious, tradition, or just because we think it is the right thing. Not one person has the right to dispute our decision. If we are wrong, we can answer to god in the next life. If there is no god, then nothing in life matters anyway.
Pay attention, the medical community is constantly wrong about things, pick almost any medical belief, and I can almost guarantee in 20 years or so there will be a different popular medical belief about it. Heck it was only about 100 years ago the doctors thought they knew everything there was to know about the human body and there was nothing more to learn.
"without his consent" LOL, what's next having to ask their consent to send them to bed. Maybe we need their consent to administer any form of punishment.


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

Pops2 said:


> BS
> it has been positively & repeatedly proven that circumsized men have a dramatically reduced incidence of contracting STDs.
> why don't you just admit you're opposed to it because of emotional issues completely unrelated to medical science.


Male circumcision and common sexually transmissible diseases in a developed nation setting. -- Donovan et al. 70 (5): 317 -- Sexually Transmitted Infections



Academic OneFileÂ  Logout


Gale - Enter Product Login



> Male non-therapeutic infant circumcision is neither medically nor ethically justified as an HIV prevention tool. Circumcision is not equivalent to successful immunisation, is being practised with decreasing frequency in English-speaking countries, and is becoming illegal in South Africa under the new Children's Act. (32) There are far more effective prevention tools costing considerably less and offering better HIV reduction outcomes than circumcision.


I try to base my opinions around peer reviewed studies from non biased sources.


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

jaredI said:


> Sure it does. As parents it is our choice, whether religious, tradition, or just because we think it is the right thing. Not one person has the right to dispute our decision. If we are wrong, we can answer to god in the next life. If there is no god, then nothing in life matters anyway.
> Pay attention, the medical community is constantly wrong about things, pick almost any medical belief, and I can almost guarantee in 20 years or so there will be a different popular medical belief about it. Heck it was only about 100 years ago the doctors thought they knew everything there was to know about the human body and there was nothing more to learn.
> "without his consent" LOL, what's next having to ask their consent to send them to bed. Maybe we need their consent to administer any form of punishment.


So by that logic you should be able to cut off his finger if you want?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

livinzoo said:


> Can you tell me what pain management they use? For years this was done without any pain management at all. Some hospitals now use sugar water, some use what is called a penile block, and some use a numbing gel. Sugar water doesn't do anything. The penile block, when done properly which many don't, can help with the pain of the procedure but not the after pains. The same with the numbing gel. I have never seen anything prescribed for the after pain.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Um, not where I was. When my daughter had to have heart surgery in 1979 they put her under.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

tinknal said:


> What does female circumcision have to do with disease transmission?
> 
> You are just ranting now. Knock it off. You look silly.


Female circumcision closes the vagina up into an extremely small hole. It abrades during sex. Sometimes the women are actually cut open with a knife so that their husbands can have sex with them for the first time. Female circumcision typically involves using one blade on all the girls who are being cut, so if one has HIV, they all get it. When there is abrading or bleeding of the vagina, when the vagina is so tight that the man's foreskin could develop small tears, the risk of bodily fluid disease transmission is higher. 

I don't see why you think female circumcision is silly, or why pointing this out is ranting, but I guess that when all else fails, personal attacks can be resorted to?


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

jaredI said:


> Sure it does. As parents it is our choice, whether religious, tradition, or just because we think it is the right thing. Not one person has the right to dispute our decision. If we are wrong, we can answer to god in the next life. If there is no god, then nothing in life matters anyway.
> Pay attention, the medical community is constantly wrong about things, pick almost any medical belief, and I can almost guarantee in 20 years or so there will be a different popular medical belief about it. Heck it was only about 100 years ago the doctors thought they knew everything there was to know about the human body and there was nothing more to learn.
> "without his consent" LOL, what's next having to ask their consent to send them to bed. Maybe we need their consent to administer any form of punishment.


It is the child's body, not yours. You want to cut part of your own body off, fine, but for a parent to ask for cosmetic surgery (and that is how Medicaid defines it now- they will not pay for it unless there is a justifiable medical reason) for a newborn infant and then say it's their choice to do so, seems as wrong as anything could be to me. We do not own our children or their bodies.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Circumcision: Medical Pros and Cons--Infections, Disease, Hygiene and Cancer on MedicineNet.com

Here's some interesting reseach regarding circumsicion. If I had a baby boy, I'd definitely get him circumsised.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

tinknal said:


> No, it's more a matter of men respecting others choices (generally) while the women who are opposed to it are (in general) raging crusaders bent on imposing their will upon others.


Oh I beg to differ, ask the husband who offered to be circumcised if I WANTED HIM TO BE or even asked? That hardly makes me a crusader in telling him no! I respected the body he came with! I love every inch of that man, he even offered to get a tattoo for me...if I wanted him to have one? I said no again, I do not have any so why should he? He just thought I might like how it would look, I told him I like how he looks with out one. He is the last guy a woman tells what to do....but he has a very soft side with me and I have always been very kind and understanding of what he has offered and never have taken advantage of him or run the show oh please..how silly! I have never and will not ever bend any one to my will....I must admit I can bend....in ways I never expect others to. My being handed a choice with my sons in having or not having them circumcised was again, my hubby offering to let me make a decision like that if I felt justified in some way...which I did not. I sure could not come up with a single reason to and I still don't. If you read my post, I state quite clearly that a person should choose according to their views.


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

fishinshawn said:


> So by that logic you should be able to cut off his finger if you want?


You are comparing apples to oranges.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Did you watch the video she posted a link to? I used to be pro-circumcision. Then I watched the videos and researched what was actually being done. I had thought it was only a meaningless little bit of skin. I changed my mind after seeing the pictures and videos....they made me feel nauseous and sickened....I had no idea.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

jaredI said:


> You are comparing apples to oranges.


True. A man only has one foreskin, and 10 fingers.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

Rick said:


> I'm curious if any of the "natural" males viewing this thread had any difficulty staying clean with no water to spare in a war zone.
> 
> *You are a good buddy and I would like to answer the question you have. My hubby is not on this site, however it is due to being with him for 28 years that I feel comfortable enough to answer.
> 
> ...


*When my sons were old enough to ask as teenagers if they were sorry they were not circumcised, they both said quite clearly NO, they would not change how they are. My Father was circumcised as was my Brother and then his Son. I was raised around men who had all had this done, it was quite normal. My daughter is married to a Navy man. Although he is circumcised he has said he would not want to have their next son circumcised either. It is a choice made by a persons own personal view on it and also, if they have been does affect them having this procedure done to their own sons. I do not make judgments in any way and men that are circumcised should feel just as good about themselves as those who are not....*


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Romy, it was in deference to you that I used the words "in general". You were the exception that proved the rule.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

What is so wrong with allowing a human child to make his own decision?

I am pro docking/cropping on animals, but I believe people should be left alone until they are old enough to decide for themselves. If they turn 18 and want to have their part of their penis cut off, or breast implants, then fine, whatever.


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

Originally Posted by Rick 
I'm curious if any of the "natural" males viewing this thread had any difficulty staying clean with no water to spare in a war zone.

Romy said: You are a good buddy and I would like to answer the question you have. My hubby is not on this site, however it is due to being with him for 28 years that I feel comfortable enough to answer. 

Glands in the foreskin produce antibacterial and antiviral proteins. These enzymes are also found in tears and other bodily fluids. This helps prevent infections naturally. Most of us know that Urine is sterile. It is more of a concern to keep a clean atmosphere for this area for anyone in time of no water, whether they are circumcised or not. 

Rick said: I just asked my Marine son about it, in a mesage. I also asked him if he ever regretted being snipped, and his intention with a newborn son.



romysbaskets said:


> *When my sons were old enough to ask as teenagers if they were sorry they were not circumcised, they both said quite clearly NO, they would not change how they are. My Father was circumcised as was my Brother and then his Son. I was raised around men who had all had this done, it was quite normal. My daughter is married to a Navy man. Although he is circumcised he has said he would not want to have their next son circumcised either. It is a choice made by a persons own personal view on it and also, if they have been does affect them having this procedure done to their own sons. I do not make judgments in any way and men that are circumcised should feel just as good about themselves as those who are not....*


Romy, my dear friend... At 5 am, after reading your post, and peeing with the remainder of the penis that my mommy left me with, I wanted to tell you : "I'm going back to bed, and I'm telling Ann you are picking on me", but I couldn't risk you thinking I was being serious, no matter how many LOL I added!

For the record, with her present knowledge, Ann is now in the 
Anti- circumcision camp. 

Can you or anyone provide links for the refuting of STD's being more prevalent, and the antibacterial and antiviral proteins?


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

Haven said:


> What is so wrong with allowing a human child to make his own decision?
> 
> I am pro docking/cropping on animals, but I believe people should be left alone until they are old enough to decide for themselves. If they turn 18 and want to have their part of their penis cut off, or breast implants, then fine, whatever.


 So how do you feel when the animal rights activists say that it's animal cruelty to dock/crop said animals? Or that you should be prosecuted for maiming that animal? After all, docking is only done for cosmetic reasons, there is absolutely no medical argument to do so.
And letting a child make his own decision? Are you serious? If I were to let my children make their own decisions on everything, I would be prosecuted for not having my kids in school, they would be running down the street naked. Staying up till 3 in the morning. Eating nothing but chocolate chips and sugar. Breaking windows in the neighbors houses, robbing the convenience stores blind. Oh where would it end.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

If harboring disease and cleanliness are the main arguments for this, then surely you would think all females should have their labia skin removed. Females have a lot more skin folds that can harbor STDs, etc compared to a natural penis...Or you could just advocate for showering and a bar of soap instead.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

jaredI said:


> So how do you feel when the animal rights activists say that it's animal cruelty to dock/crop said animals? Or that you should be prosecuted for maiming that animal? After all, docking is only done for cosmetic reasons, there is absolutely no medical argument to do so.
> And letting a child make his own decision? Are you serious? If I were to let my children make their own decisions on everything, I would be prosecuted for not having my kids in school, they would be running down the street naked. Staying up till 3 in the morning. Eating nothing but chocolate chips and sugar. Breaking windows in the neighbors houses, robbing the convenience stores blind. Oh where would it end.


People are not animals.

Where did I say children should make decisions? I actually said "people who are 18 years of age" That is considered a legal adult as far as i know.


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

jaredI said:


> As parents it is our choice, whether religious, tradition, or just because we think it is the right thing. Not one person has the right to dispute our decision.


As a parent, I'm 100% agreed on your first sentence. I don't want the gov't or anyone else interfering with parental decisions regarding discipline, circumcision, schooling or much of anything else. 

But I don't see anyone here calling for gov't control or armed intervention to halt circs. We're just having a discussion so I'm also 100% in disagreement with your second sentence. I have every right to air an opinion and say you made the wrong decision and to discourage others from making what I believe is a wrong decision. 

That your side has such a defensive attitude about this is just crazy. this is a forum for discussing ideas. Should the forum administrators post approved topics and positions just to make sure you don't have to hear an opinion you don't like?


----------



## Goatguy (Aug 23, 2007)

The way I see it...

Most every parent, when making most any decision for thier child, makes the best decision they can at the time with the information they have. A parent simply can do no better thing for thier child than that.

Whether they decide to circ or not circ, so long as they thinking it through and making what they feel is the best decision, who can blame them?

Sure, in retrospect, maybe people would change a few of the decisions they have made, but the point is, at the time, they made the best decision they could for their child with the information they had at the time.


Lastly, Though it shouldn't, I think it needs to be said. If you really want to try and convince a person to your point of view, you probably shouldn't insult them, it won't help your arguement.


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

Goatguy said:


> The way I see it...
> 
> Most every parent, when making most any decision for thier child, makes the best decision they can at the time with the information they have. A parent simply can do no better thing for thier child than that.
> 
> ...


Goatguy for President, Goatguy for President! But please, no goats in the White House, just on the lawn!

In spite of being enlightened by "insensitive", general references by some here, that my manhood is actually deformed (snicker), I think I can agree that circumcision are just uncalled for. 

Sad thing is my guess would be, that some who are vehemently against circumcision, would sign for there little girls to get Tatoos, and noses, eyebrows, navels and ??? pierced. Oops, thats none of my business.


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

Rick said:


> I'm curious if any of the "natural" males viewing this thread had any difficulty staying clean with no water to spare in a war zone.
> 
> I just asked my Marine son about it, in a mesage. I also asked him if he ever regretted being snipped, and his intention with a newborn son.


I didn't get an answer on regret, but he did mention they cut away the most sensitive part - sounds like he'd like it back.

He said all the guys complained about staying clean, and baby wipes we mailed the guys helped a lot. 

Newborn son? Quote: I won't have any part of it.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Those that are arguing against circumsicion, do you also argue against immunizations?


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

Sonshine said:


> Those that are arguing against circumsicion, do you also argue against immunizations?


Isn't that a totally unrelated, separate thread?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Rick said:


> Isn't that a totally unrelated, separate thread?


Not in my opinion, since some here are saying the parents are mutilating their children and should wait and let their sons decide for themselves. I carry scars from small pox vaccinations. There's also a lot of controversary regarding autism and immunizations. So, using the logic on letting the child decide what's best for them, should we also let them decide if they want to be vaccinated? We do what we think is best for our children. There are varying opinions on both issues. IMO, a person needs to research before making any decision for their child, then choose what they deem is best.


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

Haven said:


> What is so wrong with allowing a human child to make his own decision?


This is where you said a human child should make his own decision... Might I remind you, once said child is 18, they are no longer a child, they have just graduated into adulthood.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

Rick said:


> Originally Posted by Rick
> I'm curious if any of the "natural" males viewing this thread had any difficulty staying clean with no water to spare in a war zone.
> 
> Romy said: You are a good buddy and I would like to answer the question you have. My hubby is not on this site, however it is due to being with him for 28 years that I feel comfortable enough to answer.
> ...


*I first read about it in Men's Health Magazine as hubby handed it to me with a smile. He was thanking me yet again....silly guy. He and I discussed this last night. 

Here is a site that is pro circumcision but has stats about issues which we never experienced with our sons and my husband has never either. Since you asked for one that showed this, here you go Rick! 

Medicirc.org: Circumcision Information Site - A Lifetime of Medicial Benefits

As for a link supporting the antibacterial nature of the fluid under the foreskin... Well here is one for that that lists items in a pro natural stance
I can find a better one later today for you: 

NORM - Lost List

http://www.coloradonocirc.org/foreskin.php
*


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

jaredI said:


> You are comparing apples to oranges.


so how about the tip of his finger?


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> Circumcision: Medical Pros and Cons--Infections, Disease, Hygiene and Cancer on MedicineNet.com
> 
> Here's some interesting reseach regarding circumsicion. If I had a baby boy, I'd definitely get him circumsised.


From your link:



> In 1975, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) stated in no uncertain terms that "there is no absolute medical indication for routine circumcision of the newborn." In 1983, the AAP and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) restated this position. In 1999 and again in 2005, the AAP again restated this position of equivocation.
> 
> Currently, the practice of newborn circumcision is very common. It has been estimated that 60%-75% of all males in the United States are circumcised. This number, of course, varies depending upon ethnicity and religious affiliation.


This an opinion oriented website, not a peer reviewed study. That said I felt comfortable with quoting the AAP's statement from that site. The HIV studies they refer to are in developing countries of Africa where there is almost no condom use. A condom is cheaper, and 100x more effective then a circumcision.


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

fishinshawn said:


> Male circumcision and common sexually transmissible diseases in a developed nation setting. -- Donovan et al. 70 (5): 317 -- Sexually Transmitted Infections
> 
> 
> 
> ...



From the 3rd study


> A recent Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and WHO report (26) confirms previous reports that circumcision does not prevent sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). (27) Teens 15 years and older in the USA have the highest rate of STDs in any industrialised country and half will contract a sexually transmitted disease by age 25, despite two-thirds of young males having been circumcised. Such reports suggest that the social experiment of circumcision to prevent STDs, including HIV, has already failed in the USA, which has the highest rate of non-therapeutic infant circumcision in industrialised countries and the highest rate of HIV in the developed world. (26)


From the 1st study


> CONCLUSIONS--From the findings of this study, circumcision of men has no significant effect on the incidence of common STDs in this developed nation setting. However, these findings may not necessarily extend to other setting where hygiene is poorer and the spectrum of common STDs is different.


These are in fact peer reviewed scientific medical studies, not blogs or websites.


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> Not in my opinion, since some here are saying the parents are mutilating their children and should wait and let their sons decide for themselves. I carry scars from small pox vaccinations. There's also a lot of controversary regarding autism and immunizations. So, using the logic on letting the child decide what's best for them, should we also let them decide if they want to be vaccinated? We do what we think is best for our children. There are varying opinions on both issues. IMO, a person needs to research before making any decision for their child, then choose what they deem is best.


I'd be happy to talk about my feelings on that in another thread. That is another volatile issue. I'd rather not cloud up this thread with other stuff.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

jaredI said:


> This is where you said a human child should make his own decision... Might I remind you, once said child is 18, they are no longer a child, they have just graduated into adulthood.


Oh jesus, I said human child then went on to say that child should be able to decide once it is 18 (an adult). You have to read a person's [my] entire response. Picking out single sentences will always present things out of context.

Here is the rest of my post you left off...



Haven said:


> ...I believe people ['human child'] should be left alone until they are old enough to decide for themselves. If they turn 18 and want to have their part of their penis cut off, or breast implants, then fine, whatever.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> Not in my opinion, since some here are saying the parents are mutilating their children... I carry scars from small pox vaccinations. .


Parents mutilate their kids with cheese puffs, coke, and big macs too, but imo, junk food and vaccines is stretching it a bit when making comparisons to surgical alteration of a penis. :flameproofundies:


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Haven said:


> Parents mutilate their kids with cheese puffs, coke, and big macs too, but imo, junk food and vaccines is stretching it a bit when making comparisons to surgical alteration of a penis. :flameproofundies:


So it's ok to shoot poison into their systems, just don't follow a surgical procedure that has been around for years? Got it.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> So it's ok to shoot poison into their systems....? Got it.


Where did I say this???????


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

Haven said:


> Where did I say this???????


You didn't. There is clearly no medical reason, and most don't seem to like admitting they do it because of personal reasons, so now they start to attack for personal reasons or redirect onto other issues like vaccinations, grammar, or anything else that will take attention away from the original argument.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

fishinshawn said:


> That is not accurate in the least. Your either ignorant or lying.


No, the ignorance and lying began with your sad attempt at internet psychoanalysis. Tell me Mr. wise guy, where are your credentials?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

fishinshawn said:


> You didn't. There is clearly no medical reason, and most don't seem to like admitting they do it because of personal reasons, so now they start to attack for personal reasons or redirect onto other issues like vaccinations, grammar, or anything else that will take attention away from the original argument.


Actually, I posted a link on medical reasons and others have posted medical reasons. I don't see asking about vaccinating is attacking, but whatever. In both cases it's a decision that a parent must make. My point was that most parents try to make informed decisions.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Haven said:


> Where did I say this???????


Post 92 you stated "Parents mutilate their kids with cheese puffs, coke, and big macs too, but imo, junk food and vaccines is stretching it a bit when making comparisons to surgical alteration of a penis.

Many people do not believe circumsicion is mutilation, but a medical benefit. Some people believe that vaccines are poisonous. So, is it ok to shoot poison into their body? Do you vaccinate?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

fishinshawn said:


> You didn't. There is clearly no medical reason, and most don't seem to like admitting they do it because of personal reasons, so now they start to attack for personal reasons or redirect onto other issues like vaccinations, grammar, or anything else that will take attention away from the original argument.


So, are you a mind reader?


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> Post 92 you stated "Parents mutilate their kids with cheese puffs, coke, and big macs too, but imo, junk food and vaccines is stretching it a bit when making comparisons to surgical alteration of a penis.
> 
> Many people do not believe circumsicion is mutilation, but a medical benefit. Some people believe that vaccines are poisonous. So, is it ok to shoot poison into their body? Do you vaccinate?


Like I and others have said. Apples to oranges in comparison.

However, to answer your question, no, I do not use vaccines.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Goatguy said:


> The way I see it...
> 
> Most every parent, when making most any decision for thier child, makes the best decision they can at the time with the information they have. A parent simply can do no better thing for thier child than that.
> 
> ...


So, what if a parents thinks it's best that a child not reproduce as an adult and should therefore be castrated? Or if the son descends from a line of opera singers and the parents think he would have a great career as a castralto? Are you also OK with FGM? When is it OK and not OK to have body parts lopped off of a kid?


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

fishinshawn said:


> From your link:
> 
> 
> 
> This an opinion oriented website, not a peer reviewed study. That said I felt comfortable with quoting the AAP's statement from that site. The HIV studies they refer to are in developing countries of Africa where there is almost no condom use. A condom is cheaper, and 100x more effective then a circumcision.





fishinshawn said:


> From the 3rd study
> 
> From the 1st study
> 
> These are in fact peer reviewed scientific medical studies, not blogs or websites.





Sonshine said:


> Actually, I posted a link on medical reasons and others have posted medical reasons. I don't see asking about vaccinating is attacking, but whatever. In both cases it's a decision that a parent must make. My point was that most parents try to make informed decisions.



Your own link says it circumcision just for the heck of it provides no medical benefit. I have posted peer reviewed medical studies that show it isn't a needed procedure.

Asking about vaccinations is a subtle way of redirecting the topic, not a personal attack.


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

tinknal said:


> No, the ignorance and lying began with your sad attempt at internet psychoanalysis. Tell me Mr. wise guy, where are your credentials?


Everything you said has been refuted by modern medical science, not to mention the pain free and far safer use of a condom. So either your ignorant of the truth or your lying about not doing it for personal reasons. 

Once again, I don't agree with circumcision. BUT right now it is your legal right to do that, as such there is nothing anyone can really say or do about it, except try and educate people as to the truth. What bugs me is when someone keeps trying to justify their decision with DISINFORMATION. You don't need to justify it to anyone here, you can say I had it done for personal reasons.


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

My ex was intact - I suffered many, many UTI's as a result. Happy that my current dh is circ'd - no more UTI's. 

When my son was circ'd on the 8th day as per God's command, he barely cried out and then went happily to nursing as soon as he was given the opportunity. No worries with the healing. It really doesn't take that much skin, and he has done more "damage" to his body trying to learn to ride his bicycle at age 6 than anything that happened when he was 8 days old.

As for looking and seeing a "mutilation" every day - nope - erotic sculpture maybe but not a mutilation.


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

chamoisee said:


> So, what if a parents thinks it's best that a child not reproduce as an adult and should therefore be castrated? Or if the son descends from a line of opera singers and the parents think he would have a great career as a castralto? Are you also OK with FGM? When is it OK and not OK to have body parts lopped off of a kid?


Exactly where does it stop? I mean many kids have their tonsils removed, oh and adnoids don't do anything but cause problems right? Why not cut those off right away too?


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

fishinshawn said:


> Everything you said has been refuted by modern medical science, not to mention the pain free and far safer use of a condom. So either your ignorant of the truth or your lying about not doing it for personal reasons.


So my saying that my objection to your poor attempt at psychoanalyzing me has been refuted by modern medical science?

WOW! You really need to get over yourself, little boy.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

fishinshawn said:


> Your own link says it circumcision just for the heck of it provides no medical benefit. I have posted peer reviewed medical studies that show it isn't a needed procedure.
> 
> Asking about vaccinations is a subtle way of redirecting the topic, not a personal attack.


Yes, part of the link said that, but it also goes into all the problems that can arise by not circusizing. As for it being an opinion piece, that is your opinion. Doctors disagree all the time. And no, asking about vaccinations was not redirecting, but trying to show that what one may consider mutilation or poisoning, others may not agree with. I have no dog in this topic since my DS was already cirumsised when I adopted him and my birth kids were done without anyone asking me.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Haven said:


> Like I and others have said. Apples to oranges in comparison.
> 
> However, to answer your question, no, I do not use vaccines.


No, not apples to oranges. In one case some consider it to be mutilation, where others believe it's a practical preventative measure. Just like with vaccines, some consider them to poison the body, where others consider it preventative measures. Same principal.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

Wags said:


> My ex was intact - I suffered many, many UTI's as a result. Happy that my current dh is circ'd - no more UTI's.
> 
> When my son was circ'd on the 8th day as per God's command, he barely cried out and then went happily to nursing as soon as he was given the opportunity. No worries with the healing. It really doesn't take that much skin, and he has done more "damage" to his body trying to learn to ride his bicycle at age 6 than anything that happened when he was 8 days old.
> 
> As for looking and seeing a "mutilation" every day - nope - erotic sculpture maybe but not a mutilation.


No, no, no, no! You must be wrong! You are mistaken! Modern medical science, which as we all know is completely infallible and unbiased, says that insurance doesn't want to pay for it. Oops, I mean that circ has no medical benefit, or at least is no protection against HIV. :happy2:

I gotta say the vitriol displayed by some of the non circ crowd kinda makes me want to get my sons circ'ed.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> No, not apples to oranges... Just like with vaccines, some consider them to poison the body, where others consider it preventative measures. Same principal.


A vaccine might prevent death by polio. Circumcision might prevent a male from washing with soap. Bad comparison.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

Haven said:


> A vaccine might prevent death by polio. Circumcision might prevent a male from washing with soap. Bad comparison.


I don't know if the CDC is a good enough website for y'all, but according to this, Male Circumcision and Risk for HIV Transmission: Implications for the United States | Factsheets | CDC HIV/AIDS, circumcision does have some health benefits for females.

"_In an earlier study of couples in Uganda in which the male partner was HIV infected and the female partner was initially HIV-seronegative, the infection rates of the female partners differed by the circumcision status and viral load of the male partners. If the maleâs HIV viral load was <50,000 copies/mL, there was no HIV transmission if the man was circumcised, compared with a transmission rate of 9.6 per 100 person-years if the man was uncircumcised._"

Limited, yes, but still there. It also apparently helps the female with a couple other diseases and possibly helps males in regards to syphilis. "_Lack of male circumcision has also been associated with sexually transmitted genital ulcer disease and chlamydia, infant urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and cervical cancer in female partners of uncircumcised men [1]. The latter two conditions are related to human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Transmission of this virus is also associated with lack of male circumcision. A recent meta-analysis included 26 studies that assessed the association between male circumcision and risk for genital ulcer disease. The analysis concluded that there was a significantly lower risk for syphilis and chancroid among circumcised men, whereas the reduced risk of herpes simplex virus type 2 infection had a borderline statistical significance._"

Does it provide definite protection for anybody? No. But saying that it is completely useless healthwise isn't quite true. It does seem to provide more benefits for the female than the male, but that doesn't make it bad.

Millions of men have been circumcised throughout thousands of years of history. Millions of men have been _uncircumcised_ throughout thousands of years of history. Live and let live.



By the way, did you notice down near the bottom of the CDC site it said something about sixty some odd percent of highschool boys in one school did not seem to know if they were circ'd or not?!


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

tinknal said:


> Romy, it was in deference to you that I used the words "in general". You were the exception that proved the rule.


Why thank you! I do kind of travel to the beat of a different drum...LOL

I have to reply to all the stats that are posted above that talk about all a lady goes through with a man not circumcised... I have not had any issues pertaining to my spouse or specifically his natural state... Yet, my sisters all have had many concerns like listed above which I never have and they were with men who were all circumcised...interesting....  I am sure there are pros and cons in general, not that I have noticed any negatives so far, I am quite happy with my guy.

On the vaccines...my Mother In Law used to run out to get her flu shot every year. She promptly got the flu nearly every time. She said it was better to just get it over with??? I have never had a flu shot and hardly ever get sick. Despite a family that will get sick..I usually get to care for them lovingly and then I get to skip getting sick...now that works great for me!


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

romysbaskets said:


> Why thank you! I do kind of travel to the beat of a different drum...LOL
> 
> I have to reply to all the stats that are posted above that talk about all a lady goes through with a man not circumcised... I have not had any issues pertaining to my spouse or specifically his natural state... Yet, my sisters all have had many concerns like listed above which I never have and they were with men who were all circumcised...interesting....  I am sure there are pros and cons in general, not that I have noticed any negatives so far, I am quite happy with my guy.
> 
> On the vaccines...my Mother In Law used to run out to get her flu shot every year. She promptly got the flu nearly every time. She said it was better to just get it over with??? I have never had a flu shot and hardly ever get sick. Despite a family that will get sick..I usually get to care for them lovingly and then I get to skip getting sick...now that works great for me!


As far as the UTI's, I was wondering if it could be the guys were not "sparkling fresh" natural, or not.

BTW Thanks for the links Romy.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

:shrug:


Haven said:


> If harboring disease and cleanliness are the main arguments for this, then surely you would think all females should have their labia skin removed. Females have a lot more skin folds that can harbor STDs, etc compared to a natural penis...Or you could just advocate for showering and a bar of soap instead.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

_Originally Posted by Haven View Post
If harboring disease and cleanliness are the main arguments for this, then surely you would think all females should have their labia skin removed. Females have a lot more skin folds that can harbor STDs, etc compared to a natural penis...Or you could just advocate for showering and a bar of soap instead._

Was this in reply to me? Has it been proved that cleanliness is the only difference between the circ/non circ passing/causing disease thing? Honest question. I'm one of those google impaired people and I haven't been able to find studies to prove/disprove this. It would be interesting to see comparison between non circ'd men with different cleanliness standards. Same with circ'd. Also be interesting to see the same thing with women. Although I guess we are assuming that the men in these studies are all filthy bushmen living (and being studied) in squalor. May not be so.

I guess I just still don't understand why some are so passionate about it. When we had to make the decision, we researched and researched and still couldn't find anything really compelling either way. So, we flipped a coin.


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

thermopkt said:


> _Originally Posted by Haven View Post
> If harboring disease and cleanliness are the main arguments for this, then surely you would think all females should have their labia skin removed. Females have a lot more skin folds that can harbor STDs, etc compared to a natural penis...Or you could just advocate for showering and a bar of soap instead._
> 
> Was this in reply to me? Has it been proved that cleanliness is the only difference between the circ/non circ passing/causing disease thing? Honest question. I'm one of those google impaired people and I haven't been able to find studies to prove/disprove this. It would be interesting to see comparison between non circ'd men with different cleanliness standards. Same with circ'd. Also be interesting to see the same thing with women. Although I guess we are assuming that the men in these studies are all filthy bushmen living (and being studied) in squalor. May not be so.
> ...


We were a bit on the fence too. Only had to decide once, and he says he won't have a son he might father circumcised.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

Rick said:


> We were a bit on the fence too. Only had to decide once, and he says he won't have a son he might father circumcised.


Just out of curiosity, does he say why? If that's intrusive, I apologize and feel free not to answer.:lookout:


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

livinzoo said:


> And do you not think babies feel pain?


Of COURSE babies feel pain.



> Especially when it is an open wound constantly getting soiled with urine and feces?


Not if you take care of it correctly.



> And without being given medication to manage the pain?


Did you miss the part where I mentioned my wife was a nurse? Good Lord, of COURSE our son was given medication. 



> Could you imagine how bad the pain would be if they did Adult circs the same way they do infant ones and required that the adult wear a diaper and use it and didn't provide proper pain management?


Yes, I can. That's why we

DID

provide proper pain management, ensure he was adequately cleaned/bandaged on a VERY regular basis, etc.

I would appreciate it if you wouldn't jump to conclusions.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

chamoisee said:


> It is excruciating to newborns as well.


It CAN be. Not always 'is.'



> And it is often done without any pain medication to an infant that is physically restrained.


Again, 'often' done; not always 'is' done. Again, our son was given medication, cleaned VERY well and often, etc.

As I said, I won't look down on anyone who's not had it done, or tell them how wrong they were; in return, as I mentioned to someone else, I would ask that people not jump to conclusions. In FACT, when our son was being circumcised, we pretty much COMMANDED the doctor to give our son pain medication, just in case.

For the record, post-circumcision, our son was exactly the same; he slept a lot, occasionally took a dump/whiz, ate, and slept some more. The circumcision appeared to not bother him at all...so much so that we abandoned the use of any pain medication on a trial basis after a day or two, and completely once we realized it evidently didn't bother him in the least.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

chamoisee said:


> The health concerns you cite are "valid" in a culture where dry sex and female circumcision are practiced.


I live here in the US, and my wife can easily cite health concerns - not only from statistics, but from 12 years of personal experience working in a step-down unit in no less than 3 hospitals in 3 different states.

As I've said before (I'll say it again), this being said, while health concerns are real and valid, they aren't exactly rampant and widespread problems for everyone; therefore, it should be an individual choice. Were circumcision outlawed, I can't say as I'd be all that upset; but until that happens, it would be nice if people would realize that not everyone who chooses to circumcise their child does it because their Momma had it done to them, or that's the way it's always been, etc.

I agonized for MONTHS on whether or not to do it...so much so that when it was finally performed on my child, it was so underwhelming I almost laughed. Aside from having to tell the doctor to give my son some medicine for pain management, he slept through the whole thing.

I need to point out that I'm *NOT* an advocate for circumcision....in other words, I really could care less whether others have it done or not; and in retrospect, we'd have been fine had it not been done to our son. I'm simply pointing out that many of the assumptions being made here in this thread are just that - assumptions. People have said "And do you know they do this without any pain medicine...." or "And do you realize it can be painful to babies too??" as if I'm totally bereft of wit, and my wife (an RN, BSN, CDE) is as well.


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

thermopkt said:


> Just out of curiosity, does he say why? If that's intrusive, I apologize and feel free not to answer.:lookout:


No he didn't say, just he wouldn't be part of circumcising a son. He said ALL of his Marine company had trouble staying clean, and used baby wipes. He added also the part they take off is the most sensitive part.


----------



## TheMartianChick (May 26, 2009)

Since everyone has weighed in with their opinions, I figure that I should add mine and then add a bit of a twist to consider.

I am anti-docking for pets, anti-circumcision for baby boys, anti-ear piercing until a child is old enough to decide, anti-tattoo until a child becomes an adult and anti-vaccine for babies.(Our kids were vaccinated between the ages of 2 1/2 and 5 so that they could attend kindergarten and never attended daycare, so it wasn't required until public school.) 

With that being said, my questions are for those that believe that circumcision is best:

What in the heck would you do in the event of TEOTWAWKI if you had a baby boy born? Would you attempt to circ them yourself? How do you prep for something like that? Wouldn't you worry that the child would get an infection and die from the process? I know that they did it back in biblical times, but they didn't keep stats on the death rate from it back then.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

TheMartianChick said:


> With that being said, my questions are for those that believe that circumcision is best:
> 
> What in the heck would you do in the event of TEOTWAWKI if you had a baby boy born? Would you attempt to circ them yourself? How do you prep for something like that? Wouldn't you worry that the child would get an infection and die from the process? I know that they did it back in biblical times, but they didn't keep stats on the death rate from it back then.


Simple: I wouldn't give him one.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Kung said:


> Simple: I wouldn't give him one.


My too, or find a Mohel.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

TheMartianChick said:


> What in the heck would you do in the event of TEOTWAWKI if you had a baby boy born? Would you attempt to circ them yourself? How do you prep for something like that? Wouldn't you worry that the child would get an infection and die from the process? I know that they did it back in biblical times, but they didn't keep stats on the death rate from it back then.


I'll go out on a limb and state, that a foreskin (or lack thereof) would the be absolute least of our worries, if the world starts to end.

Like most nearly eveyone can concur - even if they don't want to - having a foreskin, or not having one, is really not that big of deal, either way.


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

Not a chance.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

I know of a family where the dad did circumcise his own son, possibly the others as well. The first one was a nightmare...no idea if he was brave enough to continue. AFAIC that was child abuse, in spades.


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

chamoisee said:


> I know of a family where the dad did circumcise his own son, possibly the others as well. The first one was a nightmare...no idea if he was brave enough to continue. AFAIC that was child abuse, in spades.


I can't even imagine trying this. SMH (shaking my head) over and over

No wonder you are so adamant about the subject.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Rick said:


> I can't even imagine trying this. SMH (shaking my head) over and over
> 
> No wonder you are so adamant about the subject.


I know of folks who have performed dentistry on their children. Are you opposed to dentistry?


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

plowjockey said:


> I'Like most nearly eveyone can concur - even if they don't want to - having a foreskin, or not having one, is really not that big of deal, either way.


I agree. I suppose thats why some people feel that "if it 'aint' broke, why mess with it"


----------



## Rick (May 10, 2002)

tinknal said:


> I know of folks who have performed dentistry on their children. Are you opposed to dentistry?


I don't even play a Dentist on television. With no professional dental cared available in an end of the world scenario, I would do what I had to do to prevent someone from dying of infection.


----------

