The old battle of circumsizing a boy?

[Gizzyy]

An intact penis is gross, but a penis whose glans has scabbed over and dried out (circumcised), due to exposure, isn't? That makes zero sense and adds to the stereotype, of the US, in which boys should be ashamed because they have their *whole* penis.

I'm baffled at all of the comments saying they (or their husbands) want their son's penis to look just like Dad's. No two penises look alike. Their dad also has pubic hair surrounding their penis. Is Dad going to shave his hair off so that his penis resembles his son's?

What if your son has a different eye color than their dad? Shall you insert colored contacts so that their eyes look alike? Why not? They see their dad's eyes MUCH more than they will ever see their dad's penis.

If your daughter's breasts are not as large as yours, will you allow her to get implants? Why not? Shouldn't your daughter look just like you? What if her vulva is different? Will you have her undergo a labiaplasty so that her private parts can look like Mom's?

Yes, all of those questions are absurd because removing a functioning organ *just so the boy will look like his dad* is asinine to me, especially when there is no medical need to do so.

The HIV study was flawed. Circumcised men were told to either abstain from sexual intercourse, during the study, OR use condoms, whereas intact men were given no such guidelines. I would never teach a son of mine to rely on his foreskin status to protect himself from STD's.

There *is* a minute increase in penile cancer in the intact male, but his chances of breast cancer (yes, breast cancer) are higher than that. IMO, circumcising a newborn to prevent penile cancer is the equivalent of having your newborn baby girl undergo a double mastectomy to prevent breast cancer (which is MUCH more common than penile cancer).

100% agree!!! People who jeer at uncircumsised penises are just sad because that's how nature intended the male genitals to be. I have no issue if parents want to go through with the operation or have it done for medical reasons, that's their choice but when people poke fun at something that is far more 'normal' than a circumsised one is when I have an issue.. This world is becoming far to vain.

 

[Maybe1daysoon]

It's not even a thing over here, we just don't do it unless it's medically necessary o.o. I don't see why you would mutilate your child in all honesty.

I've never seen an uncircumcised penis but I've seen pictures... Lol. It's pretty gross.

Wow... Just no.

If he gets a little older like in high school and is embarrassed and wants to get circumsized we will do it then, under general anesthesia.

Circumcising as an adult under general has a far far greater risk of complication than circumcising at birth. When my son was circumsized by my obgyn she said he barely cried a single tear. He was back with me and nursing within the hour.

 

[lilmonkey86]

Everyone has an opinion on circumcision but the ultimate decision needs to come from you, We were very undecided on our decision until i started looking up the medical reasons for circumcision (and although I am sure that people will disagree with this next statement) the medical benefits are there . Circumcision decreases the chances of contracting or keeping HPV (the vaccine only prevents 2 of the 20 strains) as well as preventing the spread of HIV(that being said I don't condone having unprotected sex just because this risk is decreased), uncircumcised men have a 1 in 1000 chance of developing penile cancer, circumcised men have a 1 in 50,000 chance of developing penile cancer. All of these health benefits outweigh the risks in my own personal opinion and the opinion of the American Pediatric Society thus the reason my little guy will be circumcised, that being said I respect everyone's opinion on the matter and think that each parent should decide what they think is best for their child.

 

[PumpkinBump]

It's not even a thing over here, we just don't do it unless it's medically necessary o.o. I don't see why you would mutilate your child in all honesty.

I've never seen an uncircumcised penis but I've seen pictures... Lol. It's pretty gross.

Wow... Just no.

If he gets a little older like in high school and is embarrassed and wants to get circumsized we will do it then, under general anesthesia.

Circumcising as an adult under general has a far far greater risk of complication than circumcising at birth. When my son was circumsized by my obgyn she said he barely cried a single tear. He was back with me and nursing within the hour.

True, but he may not want to be circumsized, and i see no point in it at all. Ill leave him the way God made him, and if he doesnt like it later than he can choose to be circumsized as an older child or adult.

I know men who are circumsized and wish they werent. Too bad its not as easy to do a reversal circumsizion on them. Its possible, but not very easy.

 

[cookette]

It's not even a thing over here, we just don't do it unless it's medically necessary o.o. I don't see why you would mutilate your child in all honesty.

I've never seen an uncircumcised penis but I've seen pictures... Lol. It's pretty gross.

Wow... Just no.

If he gets a little older like in high school and is embarrassed and wants to get circumsized we will do it then, under general anesthesia.

Circumcising as an adult under general has a far far greater risk of complication than circumcising at birth. When my son was circumsized by my obgyn she said he barely cried a single tear. He was back with me and nursing within the hour.

True, but he may not want to be circumsized, and i see no point in it at all. Ill leave him the way God made him, and if he doesnt like it later than he can choose to be circumsized as an older child or adult.

I know men who are circumsized and wish they werent. Too bad its not as easy to do a reversal circumsizion on them. Its possible, but not very easy.

I think the intentions behind circumcision are the point here. For me, doing it "just to be like dad" isnt enough. But religiously, it's important to me. Health wise, it's enough to make me firmer in my stance, even though the "chance" of any miniscule benefit is very minimal. I dont think its fair to compare circ to something like ear piercing if your intent is beyond cosmetic.

I also think the "ugly" comments are out of line, for both sides. I could care less what it looks like, it's all what you're used to that forms that opinion and that varies all around the world.

 

[N27murray]

Uh oh... I feel this friendly thread of opinions is beginning to get intense...

 

[kazine]

When people start referring to penises as "gross", people with intact partners or sons are going to start getting annoyed.

 

[N27murray]

One thing I'm baffled by. How can having extra skin increase the risk of cancer? I think that's baloney... Cancer risk increases depending on how much processed food we eat too, and keeping our cell phones on our person, etc etc and the list goes on.

bottom line, some people think circumcision is best and some think its not. I have stated my opinion on it already so no point trying to sway those who disagree.

 

[lilmonkey86]

I respect your opinion but to answer your question about how it increases the cancer risk, men who are circumcised cannot develop the condition called phimosis. Penile cancer is more common in men with phimosis, because the skin becomes tight making the foreskin more difficult to retract full causing an inflammation in the penis and the inflammation and pressure has been proved to cause an increase risk of Penile cancer. so that's how.

One thing I'm baffled by. How can having extra skin increase the risk of cancer? I think that's baloney... Cancer risk increases depending on how much processed food we eat too, and keeping our cell phones on our person, etc etc and the list goes on.

bottom line, some people think circumcision is best and some think its not. I have stated my opinion on it already so no point trying to sway those who disagree.

 

[N27murray]

Thanks I guess that makes a little more sense.
now, the foreskin will only tighten too much if the boy/man isn't properly pulling it back daily...which should be done anyways for cleaning.. ?

either way, my point was cancer risk increases over almost EVERYTHING we do or don't do in our lives so I personally wouldn't use that as my reasoning to circumcise.
however, I appreciate and respect your point ...your point is more valid (to me) than just "it looks better" lol. In twenty years, how our sons penis looks should be none of our concern. Hehe
so thanks for that tidbit of info

 

[snickersbar]

I find this whole discussion really interesting as it's never something that crossed my mind (as pp have said we don't tend to do this in UK). I personally like 'intact' penises (never thought I'd be writing that phrase) and while they are not the most attractive part of a man on their own, I think on the whole they look ok, nothing gross or weird about them. If I was used to circumsised penises (peni?) then I would probably prefer that.

Quite glad this isn't a 'thing' in the UK as it's one more thing to worry about!

 

[Gizzyy]

I find this whole discussion really interesting as it's never something that crossed my mind (as pp have said we don't tend to do this in UK). I personally like 'intact' penises (never thought I'd be writing that phrase) and while they are not the most attractive part of a man on their own, I think on the whole they look ok, nothing gross or weird about them. If I was used to circumsised penises (peni?) then I would probably prefer that.

Quite glad this isn't a 'thing' in the UK as it's one more thing to worry about!

I find it intriguing too as I'm also from the uk and it's never discussed. A penis is a penis at the end of the day. They come in a variety of shapes and sizes lol. I also prefer the intact version as it's the natural version. Just like I wouldn't like my man to shave down there, wax his chest or have any procedures done. It's just what he was born with and I'm happy with how it is.

 

[purplecupcake]

An intact penis is gross, but a penis whose glans has scabbed over and dried out (circumcised), due to exposure, isn't? That makes zero sense and adds to the stereotype, of the US, in which boys should be ashamed because they have their *whole* penis.

I'm baffled at all of the comments saying they (or their husbands) want their son's penis to look just like Dad's. No two penises look alike. Their dad also has pubic hair surrounding their penis. Is Dad going to shave his hair off so that his penis resembles his son's?

What if your son has a different eye color than their dad? Shall you insert colored contacts so that their eyes look alike? Why not? They see their dad's eyes MUCH more than they will ever see their dad's penis.

If your daughter's breasts are not as large as yours, will you allow her to get implants? Why not? Shouldn't your daughter look just like you? What if her vulva is different? Will you have her undergo a labiaplasty so that her private parts can look like Mom's?

Yes, all of those questions are absurd because removing a functioning organ *just so the boy will look like his dad* is asinine to me, especially when there is no medical need to do so.

The HIV study was flawed. Circumcised men were told to either abstain from sexual intercourse, during the study, OR use condoms, whereas intact men were given no such guidelines. I would never teach a son of mine to rely on his foreskin status to protect himself from STD's.

There *is* a minute increase in penile cancer in the intact male, but his chances of breast cancer (yes, breast cancer) are higher than that. IMO, circumcising a newborn to prevent penile cancer is the equivalent of having your newborn baby girl undergo a double mastectomy to prevent breast cancer (which is MUCH more common than penile cancer).

Yes yes yes! Great post, thank you.


If this discussion were about removing a baby girl's clitoris or labia at birth, there would be outrage. There is no difference, it's genital mutilation either way. It's taking a part of someone's body from them without their consent. Sure, they may be numbed for the procedure, but the pain of the healing process must be excruciating. I cannot imagine what it would feel like to have hot urine bathed over an open wound, sticking to a diaper.

 

[modified]

An intact penis is gross, but a penis whose glans has scabbed over and dried out (circumcised), due to exposure, isn't? That makes zero sense and adds to the stereotype, of the US, in which boys should be ashamed because they have their *whole* penis.

I'm baffled at all of the comments saying they (or their husbands) want their son's penis to look just like Dad's. No two penises look alike. Their dad also has pubic hair surrounding their penis. Is Dad going to shave his hair off so that his penis resembles his son's?

What if your son has a different eye color than their dad? Shall you insert colored contacts so that their eyes look alike? Why not? They see their dad's eyes MUCH more than they will ever see their dad's penis.

If your daughter's breasts are not as large as yours, will you allow her to get implants? Why not? Shouldn't your daughter look just like you? What if her vulva is different? Will you have her undergo a labiaplasty so that her private parts can look like Mom's?

Yes, all of those questions are absurd because removing a functioning organ *just so the boy will look like his dad* is asinine to me, especially when there is no medical need to do so.

The HIV study was flawed. Circumcised men were told to either abstain from sexual intercourse, during the study, OR use condoms, whereas intact men were given no such guidelines. I would never teach a son of mine to rely on his foreskin status to protect himself from STD's.

There *is* a minute increase in penile cancer in the intact male, but his chances of breast cancer (yes, breast cancer) are higher than that. IMO, circumcising a newborn to prevent penile cancer is the equivalent of having your newborn baby girl undergo a double mastectomy to prevent breast cancer (which is MUCH more common than penile cancer).

Yes yes yes! Great post, thank you.


If this discussion were about removing a baby girl's clitoris or labia at birth, there would be outrage. There is no difference, it's genital mutilation either way. It's taking a part of someone's body from them without their consent. Sure, they may be numbed for the procedure, but the pain of the healing process must be excruciating. I cannot imagine what it would feel like to have hot urine bathed over an open wound, sticking to a diaper.

Fully agree with both of you - it's genital mutilation, whether that makes you uncomfortable or not. And cancer? Like a PP suggested, will you be removing your own, your daughters, your sons and your husbands breast tissue to reduce the risk of breast cancer? Why is the penis different?

 

[Gizzyy]

An intact penis is gross, but a penis whose glans has scabbed over and dried out (circumcised), due to exposure, isn't? That makes zero sense and adds to the stereotype, of the US, in which boys should be ashamed because they have their *whole* penis.

I'm baffled at all of the comments saying they (or their husbands) want their son's penis to look just like Dad's. No two penises look alike. Their dad also has pubic hair surrounding their penis. Is Dad going to shave his hair off so that his penis resembles his son's?

What if your son has a different eye color than their dad? Shall you insert colored contacts so that their eyes look alike? Why not? They see their dad's eyes MUCH more than they will ever see their dad's penis.

If your daughter's breasts are not as large as yours, will you allow her to get implants? Why not? Shouldn't your daughter look just like you? What if her vulva is different? Will you have her undergo a labiaplasty so that her private parts can look like Mom's?

Yes, all of those questions are absurd because removing a functioning organ *just so the boy will look like his dad* is asinine to me, especially when there is no medical need to do so.

The HIV study was flawed. Circumcised men were told to either abstain from sexual intercourse, during the study, OR use condoms, whereas intact men were given no such guidelines. I would never teach a son of mine to rely on his foreskin status to protect himself from STD's.

There *is* a minute increase in penile cancer in the intact male, but his chances of breast cancer (yes, breast cancer) are higher than that. IMO, circumcising a newborn to prevent penile cancer is the equivalent of having your newborn baby girl undergo a double mastectomy to prevent breast cancer (which is MUCH more common than penile cancer).

Yes yes yes! Great post, thank you.


If this discussion were about removing a baby girl's clitoris or labia at birth, there would be outrage. There is no difference, it's genital mutilation either way. It's taking a part of someone's body from them without their consent. Sure, they may be numbed for the procedure, but the pain of the healing process must be excruciating. I cannot imagine what it would feel like to have hot urine bathed over an open wound, sticking to a diaper.

Fully agree with both of you - it's genital mutilation, whether that makes you uncomfortable or not. And cancer? Like a PP suggested, will you be removing your own, your daughters, your sons and your husbands breast tissue to reduce the risk of breast cancer? Why is the penis different?

Exactly.. You can get cancer anywhere unfortunately but you can't go round removing everything 'just incase'

 

[bdb84]

According to this website, the chances of a male having breast cancer is 1 in 1,000. A previous poster stated that the statistics for penile cancer, among uncircumcised men, is also 1 in 1,000, which is one medical preventative that parents use for circumcising their newborns. Since these parents are pro-prevention, I assume they are removing their boy's breast tissue as well since their chances of breast cancer are just as likely?

And let's touch on the chances of breast cancer in females. About 1 in 8 women will have invasive breast cancer in their lifetime. 1 in 8. Do we perform double mastectomies on our newborn daughters, because if we are going to fight for prevention, SURELY this is the one to fight.

But we don't. Why? Because of the chances that using our own forms of natural prevention (routine exams) will help lessen our chances?

Why do we not afford the same opportunity for our boys? Because it may "hurt more" when they older? Because they may be made fun of? Because they may get a UTI?

 

[purplespecs]

I'm in the UK where circumcision is pretty much unheard of unless for religious or medical reasons. This video popped up on my Facebook newsfeed today and I immediately thought of this thread... I really don't mean to offend anyone here who circumcises, I was just interested to learn the history behind why many Americans circumcise (and, well, I thought it was done in an amusing way )

https://www.collegehumor.com/video/6966989/the-real-reason-youre-circumcised

 

[Gizzyy]

I'm in the UK where circumcision is pretty much unheard of unless for religious or medical reasons. This video popped up on my Facebook newsfeed today and I immediately thought of this thread... I really don't mean to offend anyone here who circumcises, I was just interested to learn the history behind why many Americans circumcise (and, well, I thought it was done in an amusing way )

https://www.collegehumor.com/video/6966989/the-real-reason-youre-circumcised

 

[leahtaba]

Its not the norm here but OH had it done five years ago for medical reasons. He says he preferred it before.

circumsizing my son so he looks like his dad is as absurd to me as asking them to perform an episiotomy on my daughter so she looks like me.

 

[Eriamel]

I live in the USA and have lived here for the last couple of years. But I grew up in Belgium in Europe (small country in between The Netherlands and France and Great Britain across the North Sea).

Circumcision just like in the UK is not the norm, it is the exception so my previous boyfriends were all intact so to me it was weird after meeting my husband, who is circumcised.

If we have a boy, we won't be doing it. He doesn't see the point of it either, even though he is circumcised himself. It's definitely not unsanitary. That's just pro-circ propaganda that makes no sense at all, sorry. If you wash your baby and if you later as a grown man shower and wash your private parts properly there is nothing unhealthy or dirty about it.

It's my personal choice, and the people that do choose to do it, that's also their personal choice. But claiming that intact penises are ugly/dirty/gross... hmmm a little short sighted no?