debsbaby
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2010
- Messages
- 715
- Reaction score
- 0
My sister had her son (now 4 years old) circumcised and it took that poor boy's penis until he was nearly 18 months old to heal! She felt so guilty for his discomfort because it definitely bothered him. Despite keeping it medicated, urine would burn and sometimes it would get stuck to his diaper.
She was very concerned about it, and now it is likely that he has excess scar tissue that can make his penis crooked (circumcision is the reason for crooked penises, btw, with the exception of a few other rare medical conditions).
The foreskin also seems very loose when a boy is young but during and after puberty, the penis grows to the point that the foreskin may not even cover the glans fully due to penile growth. A problem with circumcision is also that it can shorten the penis due to removing all that skin, much of which is "grown into" at puberty and when a man has an erection, part of that erection is "pulled" back into his body. Ever noticed hairs on the part of your OH's penis that is close to his body? That is because it is actually skin from his scrotum and groin area being pulled up onto the penis to try to accomodate his erection since there is no foreskin, only rigid scar tissue to do the job.
I guess what bothers me is the assumption by parents that it is their right to make this decision for their child. It is irreversible. If I were a man and I had to be circumcised later in life, I would consider the slightly more extended recovery a small price to pay for my parents having decided to let ME decide if I wanted MY genitals intact or mutilated. After all, I would be the one taking care of them (post potty training) and having sex with them...not my parents!
As women, how would we feel if our parents decided at birth to remove the clitoral hood, which sometimes includes removing all or part of the clitoris? We call this FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION. In countries where it is practiced, it is a Type 1 female circumcision (and yes, there are more horrid ones that remove the labia, etc). This type 1 mutilation is biologically the equivalent of a baby boy's circumcision. Why does one horrify us and the other seem perfectly acceptable?
There are entire online groups out there full of men who are trying to restore their foreskins. Here is a site and you can read quotes from the men, themselves, plus get lots of information.
https://www.norm.org/index.html
I will not be responsible for making such an irreversible decision for my son (just as I left my older son intact 14 years ago).
She was very concerned about it, and now it is likely that he has excess scar tissue that can make his penis crooked (circumcision is the reason for crooked penises, btw, with the exception of a few other rare medical conditions).
The foreskin also seems very loose when a boy is young but during and after puberty, the penis grows to the point that the foreskin may not even cover the glans fully due to penile growth. A problem with circumcision is also that it can shorten the penis due to removing all that skin, much of which is "grown into" at puberty and when a man has an erection, part of that erection is "pulled" back into his body. Ever noticed hairs on the part of your OH's penis that is close to his body? That is because it is actually skin from his scrotum and groin area being pulled up onto the penis to try to accomodate his erection since there is no foreskin, only rigid scar tissue to do the job.
I guess what bothers me is the assumption by parents that it is their right to make this decision for their child. It is irreversible. If I were a man and I had to be circumcised later in life, I would consider the slightly more extended recovery a small price to pay for my parents having decided to let ME decide if I wanted MY genitals intact or mutilated. After all, I would be the one taking care of them (post potty training) and having sex with them...not my parents!
As women, how would we feel if our parents decided at birth to remove the clitoral hood, which sometimes includes removing all or part of the clitoris? We call this FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION. In countries where it is practiced, it is a Type 1 female circumcision (and yes, there are more horrid ones that remove the labia, etc). This type 1 mutilation is biologically the equivalent of a baby boy's circumcision. Why does one horrify us and the other seem perfectly acceptable?
There are entire online groups out there full of men who are trying to restore their foreskins. Here is a site and you can read quotes from the men, themselves, plus get lots of information.
https://www.norm.org/index.html
I will not be responsible for making such an irreversible decision for my son (just as I left my older son intact 14 years ago).
