Recent Circumcision Analysis - What do you guys think?

[Natsku]

To be honest, the sight of a circumsized penis horrifies me.

They do look weird

 

[BrandiCanucks]

Mayo Clinic and the AAP list the benefits as being:

-Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it simpler to wash the penis. Washing beneath the foreskin of an uncircumcised penis is generally easy, however.

-Decreased risk of urinary tract infections. The overall risk of urinary tract infections in males is low, but these infections are more common in uncircumcised males. Severe infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later on.

-Decreased risk of sexually transmitted infections. Circumcised men might have a lower risk of certain sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Still, safe sexual practices remain essential.

-Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis can be difficult or impossible to retract (phimosis). This can lead to inflammation of the foreskin or head of the penis.

-Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is rare, it's less common in circumcised men. In addition, cervical cancer is less common in the female sexual partners of circumcised men.

HOWEVER, neither recommend routine circumcision because the benefits are not significant enough to recommend it. They DO, however, recommend anesthetic for those infant males who have it done.

HBGirl...that's kind of an ignorant comment, and honestly gives off the impression that you look at many penises to see if they're cut or not. I don't think this thread is about what kind of penises we prefer as women, but what our opinion of the initial article is.

 

[Noodlebear]

There's nothing wrong with someone stating they dislike a body modification, that's not ignorant. Your comment 'gives off the impression that you look at many penises to see if they're cut or not' is very rude. (I'd like to point out that in order to have that opinion she may well have seen a grand total of 2 naked men so shall we not turn into juvenile teenagers.) She's entitled to an opinion, I wouldn't go as far as to say they horrify me but I don't like the look of a circumcised penis either. It may not be what the article is about but it's not exactly irrelevant. Just another argument against mutilating our children.

 

[babycrazy1706]

I don't like how circumcised looks either.

 

[cookette]

To be honest, the sight of a circumsized penis horrifies me.

And I think a non-circ one looks...scary. Like some hooded animal...


lol, it's all in what you're used to, I suppose.

 

[BrandiCanucks]

There's nothing wrong with someone stating they dislike a body modification, that's not ignorant. Your comment 'gives off the impression that you look at many penises to see if they're cut or not' is very rude. (I'd like to point out that in order to have that opinion she may well have seen a grand total of 2 naked men so shall we not turn into juvenile teenagers.) She's entitled to an opinion, I wouldn't go as far as to say they horrify me but I don't like the look of a circumcised penis either. It may not be what the article is about but it's not exactly irrelevant. Just another argument against mutilating our children.

There's a difference between stating you don't like a body modification and stating the sight is horrific...as if it's a mangled and bloody murder scene. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion and choice on the matter, I agree, but the wording is extremely ignorant.

Personally, I don't like the look of an intact penis, but I'd never use the word horrify to describe what it looks like.

And if we're not going to turn into juvenile teenagers, using words such as mutilate to describe the removal of a piece of skin goes a little overboard.

The definition of mutilate is

mutilate  


mu·ti·late [myoot-l-eyt]
verb (used with object), mu·ti·lat·ed, mu·ti·lat·ing.
1.
to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts: Vandals mutilated the painting.
2.
to deprive (a person or animal) of a limb or other essential part.

According to Mirriam-Webster

: to cut up or alter radically so as to make imperfect <the child mutilated the book with his scissors>
2
: to cut off or permanently destroy a limb or essential part of

Who decides what is perfect and what is not anyway? A circumcision does not "radically alter" a penis. Underneath that foreskin, the penis looks exactly the same, and a circumcision does not deprive a person of their limb or essential part. Cutting off their entire penis, sure, that is mutilation, as it completely affects the functionality of the penis, and even existence of the penis, but removal of the foreskin does not affect the boy's ability to urinate, achieve an erection, or have children, so using terms such as mutilation is extremely overboard and juvenile.

 

[Noodlebear]

In my opinion it is mutilation. As I said before, I'd be prosecuted if I did it to a little girl, people who perform the procedure do so because they believe the 'benefits' are all very similar to those of circumcision. If the fact that I don't have double standards makes me childish then I can live with that. Children deserve better than to be treated like that 'just because'.

 

[Noodlebear]

And to answer some of the stuff you've added since my reply - 'who decides what is perfect and what is not anyway?' My thoughts exactly. How can permanently altering someone else's genitals be justified? The human body is 'perfect' as it is and I won't have my son thinking any differently.

 

[cookette]

In my opinion it is mutilation. As I said before, I'd be prosecuted if I did it to a little girl, people who perform the procedure do so because they believe the 'benefits' are all very similar to those of circumcision. If the fact that I don't have double standards makes me childish then I can live with that. Children deserve better than to be treated like that 'just because'.

(Not directly replying to this post, more like this topic indirectly...)

I usually try to skim over conversations on this topic because I dont feel the need to defend myself on the decisions I will make for *my* child, just as I respect everyone else's right to disagree and do what is best for them also. My reasons are religious, and for me, that is very important and above "just because." Not everyone feels the same. Some people argue that its outdated. But to me, its very valid.

I need to quit coming on these threads, its my own fault, but I try to be open minded and I peruse through these because I genuinely want to hear both sides!

 

[emyandpotato]

To be honest, the sight of a circumsized penis horrifies me.

They do look weird

Really?! I think they look way better. My first boyfriend was circ'd and the next one I saw I genuinely thought there was something wrong with it!

 

[Midnight_Fairy]

Nope.

 

[BrandiCanucks]

Well a female circumcision removes the entire clitoris, which increases the risk of recurrent infections, affects the ability to achieve orgasm, directly affects the body's ability to naturally lubricate and also affects a woman's fertility, whether directly a result of the infections or what type of female circumcision is performed. Removal of an entire organ cannot be compared to removal of a piece of skin. Female circumcision IS mutilation because it removes the entire organ and affects the complete functionality of the woman's reproductive organs.

I've yet to meet or hear of a circumcised man whose circumcision prevented him from being able to urinate, achieve orgasm, produce children or lubricate itself.

And truth be told, unless you go around asking every mother whether they circ'd their son or not, and then asked the reasons behind the circumcision, you truly don't know why they chose circumcision for their child. Assuming it's "just because" is quite the assumption. Circumcision isn't something parents just do "just because". We do do our research, and ask questions, ask opinions, look for medical research, look at our family history, or religions we practice. We don't just pop out boys and go "Sure doc! Chop it off!"

Yes, I circumcised my son, and will be circumcising this baby as well, but it has nothing to do with "just because". I'm confident in my choice as my boys' mom to circumcise them, and feel it is truly in their best interests to circumcise. It doesn't make me a bad mother, or an abusive mother. I'm not mutilating my boys. It's not wrong. They are fed, clothed, have a roof over their head, have plenty of love and nurturing and support. Circumcising them doesn't mean I love them any less. It's a choice that I based on family history, research, asking questions, and in the end felt was the best decision for my boys. Just as choosing to leave your son intact doesn't make you a bad mom or any less loving, or wrong. You made that decision based on what you felt was best for your son and your family, and that's what we do as circ'ing parents too.

Really...unless someone is forcing it (or any other controversial topic) on your own child, I fail to see where people are allowed to have an opinion or input on what other parents choose for their child.

 

[Noodlebear]

In my opinion it is mutilation. As I said before, I'd be prosecuted if I did it to a little girl, people who perform the procedure do so because they believe the 'benefits' are all very similar to those of circumcision. If the fact that I don't have double standards makes me childish then I can live with that. Children deserve better than to be treated like that 'just because'.

(Not directly replying to this post, more like this topic indirectly...)

I usually try to skim over conversations on this topic because I dont feel the need to defend myself on the decisions I will make for *my* child, just as I respect everyone else's right to disagree and do what is best for them also. My reasons are religious, and for me, that is very important and above "just because." Not everyone feels the same. Some people argue that its outdated. But to me, its very valid.

I need to quit coming on these threads, its my own fault, but I try to be open minded and I peruse through these because I genuinely want to hear both sides!

I am generally very open minded, there are 2 subject matters that I feel so strongly about and this is 1 of them. I've found myself agreeing with you on many other threads, you seem like a nice person and my intention is definitely not to upset you. I feel that if it is not medically necessary then it shouldn't be done. If this is a topic close to home then I think it might be best to avoid these threads, strong opinions are unavoidable (and I'm full of them). Although I admire you for wanting to hear 'the other side' and think it's important to stand by your decisions.

 

[Noodlebear]

Brandi if you fail to see why we as mothers are allowed to have an opinion on parenting choices perhaps a parenting forum isn't the best place for you?

 

[cookette]

In my opinion it is mutilation. As I said before, I'd be prosecuted if I did it to a little girl, people who perform the procedure do so because they believe the 'benefits' are all very similar to those of circumcision. If the fact that I don't have double standards makes me childish then I can live with that. Children deserve better than to be treated like that 'just because'.

(Not directly replying to this post, more like this topic indirectly...)

I usually try to skim over conversations on this topic because I dont feel the need to defend myself on the decisions I will make for *my* child, just as I respect everyone else's right to disagree and do what is best for them also. My reasons are religious, and for me, that is very important and above "just because." Not everyone feels the same. Some people argue that its outdated. But to me, its very valid.

I need to quit coming on these threads, its my own fault, but I try to be open minded and I peruse through these because I genuinely want to hear both sides!

I am generally very open minded, there are 2 subject matters that I feel so strongly about and this is 1 of them. I've found myself agreeing with you on many other threads, you seem like a nice person and my intention is definitely not to upset you. I feel that if it is not medically necessary then it shouldn't be done. If this is a topic close to home then I think it might be best to avoid these threads, strong opinions are unavoidable (and I'm full of them). Although I admire you for wanting to hear 'the other side' and think it's important to stand by your decisions.

I've seen you around too, and I appreciate your posts because they tend to be very FACTUAL and not emotional "cause I said so and I wanna" kinda statements. Not upset at all, just skimming the surface of this pond

 

[TriChick]

While I can see both sides of the debate, I think that it might hit home to circ moms (regardless of their reasons) if women are stating that they are horrified at the sight of a circumcised penis. I can see why mothers would feel defensive if they felt as though people were making fun of their child's body part. Stating opinions is one thing (it IS a debate after all), but talking about how strange a baby's body part looks can illicite strong reactions. I've seen it happen with people commenting on the appearance of uncircumcised penises as well, and can understand how parents can take that to heart. We are all protective of our babies, after all

 

[BrandiCanucks]

I think you've misunderstood me. Mothers can have an opinion on parenting choices...but they have no place to have an opinion on the choices other mothers make for their own children. By "you", I mean people in general...If it's not directly affecting you or your children, who are you to say that one parent is wrong for the choice they make for their child? If the parent is not neglecting or abusing their child with the choices they feel are best for their child, then who are you to have an opinion on how they choose to raise them?

If you read my first response in this thread, you'll find that I was actually AGAINST the article linked in the initial post. I may be a circ'ing parent, but I'm neither pro nor anti circ. I'm pro-allowing a parent to make the choices they feel are best for their children without being attacked or judged or being accused of being abusers, mutilators, or having it suggested they don't care for their children because it's not the choice another parent would make for their children.

 

[BrandiCanucks]

And for the record, my son may be circ'd, but it doesn't make him any less perfect

 

[Natsku]

Well a female circumcision removes the entire clitoris, which increases the risk of recurrent infections, affects the ability to achieve orgasm, directly affects the body's ability to naturally lubricate and also affects a woman's fertility, whether directly a result of the infections or what type of female circumcision is performed. Removal of an entire organ cannot be compared to removal of a piece of skin. Female circumcision IS mutilation because it removes the entire organ and affects the complete functionality of the woman's reproductive organs.

I've yet to meet or hear of a circumcised man whose circumcision prevented him from being able to urinate, achieve orgasm, produce children or lubricate itself.

And truth be told, unless you go around asking every mother whether they circ'd their son or not, and then asked the reasons behind the circumcision, you truly don't know why they chose circumcision for their child. Assuming it's "just because" is quite the assumption. Circumcision isn't something parents just do "just because". We do do our research, and ask questions, ask opinions, look for medical research, look at our family history, or religions we practice. We don't just pop out boys and go "Sure doc! Chop it off!"

Yes, I circumcised my son, and will be circumcising this baby as well, but it has nothing to do with "just because". I'm confident in my choice as my boys' mom to circumcise them, and feel it is truly in their best interests to circumcise. It doesn't make me a bad mother, or an abusive mother. I'm not mutilating my boys. It's not wrong. They are fed, clothed, have a roof over their head, have plenty of love and nurturing and support. Circumcising them doesn't mean I love them any less. It's a choice that I based on family history, research, asking questions, and in the end felt was the best decision for my boys. Just as choosing to leave your son intact doesn't make you a bad mom or any less loving, or wrong. You made that decision based on what you felt was best for your son and your family, and that's what we do as circ'ing parents too.

Really...unless someone is forcing it (or any other controversial topic) on your own child, I fail to see where people are allowed to have an opinion or input on what other parents choose for their child.

There are several different versions of female circumcision and one of them is in fact the exact equivalent of male circumcision. And male circumcision does technically prevent the male from being able to lubricate himself - the foreskin keeps the glans lubricated which aids in sex (as well as in the other ways it aids in sex).

 

[Noodlebear]

And for the record, my son may be circ'd, but it doesn't make him any less perfect

I didn't say any child was less than perfect. Modifying a child's body before they're even aware of it doesn't send the right messages about body image and perfection.