Would you circumcise your son?
 

1. Would you circumcise your son?
2. If you are circumcised and had the choice, would'ya keep it that way?

1. Yes
2. Yes

Looks better and is cleaner. Simple as that.

1. No

Pointless.

Yes & Yes

No, but here's the thing..

people have a certain pride about their own bodies. My guess is that about 95% of the people who vote will choose the same choice that was made for them.

I'm uncut and wouldn't have it any other way. The US is the only country in the world where the avg girl would consider an uncut dick to be unusual. I don't care about that.. I'm perfectly natural and quite well shaped.. I'd hate to see what I looked like cut.

No I wouldn't circumcise my son - I'd get the doctor to do it for me ;) Just kidding. I'm perfectly happy uncut, so I'd leave the decision up to my son.

Definately not.

The way nature intended it to be.

I am and would to my son. They used to do it for health reasons. And I don't see how the foreskin has gotten any healthier.

definately not... do you know why babies don't cry during circumcision? it's because they go into shock from the pain. no painkillers can be used during the surgery because the child is too young. I've already talk to my girlfriend about this and we've both decided that our boys definately don't need anything cut off.

EDIT: Also, i'm not sure if many people know how circumcision became a common practice in the usa. Forgive me, but I don't remember the names or years, it was quite a long time ago that I read the article, but it began with a wealthy man who's son had some sort of infection in his foreskin/penis. Anyways, long story short, doctors suggested cutting the foreskin on his son's penis. They cut it, the son made a perfect recovery. They didn't really understand why he had the infection but in the years following, circumcision became the wonder cure for cleanliness and the number one preventive medicine in the country. The idea behind it is, cut off the skin because something bad MIGHT happen. By that logic we should pull out our teeth because we MIGHT let them rot so bad that they'll become infected.

i'm cut, and i certainly wouldn't force it on my son.

a question to people who do it for health reasons:

yes, i'm aware that foreskin can get dirty, but so can children's hands, would you cut them off as well, or would you teach your child to wash his hands?

that's one way to put it, daoist.

My reasoning is this: We are all born with it. There is an evolutionary REASON why we have it. With proper hygeine, it is never a problem. The scar tissue created by a circumcision can cause some bending later in life when the kid goes through puberty. If done improperly, it can actually shorten the penis at full erection due to tightness of the skin.

Go foreskin.

No, I woudln't circumsize my son.
I am circumsized and would probably rather be uncut. I've thought about it before and it just seems like it would be more natural. Not to mention kinda cool maybe?

well... im cut... as for a possible son in the future... i dont know... id have to think about it...

If I stay in the US, then yes. I don't think it makes much difference either way physically, and he will have less hygene problems and won't stand out as 'unusual' in a country where most people are circumcised.

I am circumcised, but my brother is not. I guess my parents were hedging their bets.

1. I am not cut.
2. No way. I would feel a gap in my life if part of my penis was missing. Specially to think some doctor had a scalpal and chopped part of my dick off....
so for a son to have it done, Hell no

Yes, I would, I did, and he is now nine.
And Yes. I've been told I have a very well-shaped member, and I am circumsized.

I am, and I would my son... due to be born this christmas.

I would absolutely not circumsize a baby boy unless it were truly necessary.

I am cut and wish I weren't.

I wouldn't. If he wants it cut later, he can request the surgery when he is older. Only if the foreskin is unusually long or tight do men usually choose to have circumcisions later in life.

Yes I am and so are my sons. If I weren't I don't think I could have sex for more than a minute. Way too sensitive.

I am and so is my son.
The only thing was it hurt so much he didn't walk for a year. By the way he is now almost 3.

1. Yes
2. Yes

Hal made some great points. It all has to do with what you are comfortable with and with what was done to you.

I am not and niether is my 6 month old son.

There is NO need to cut off the foreskin. There used to be when hygene was not as good as it is now... its a cruel thing to do and there is no reason anymore.

Also... I think that a penis head with a foresekin is more senstive due to the cover it has. So I would guess (I'm guessing becuase I have a foreskin) so better sexual pleasure for an uncut man.

:D

No. I'm uncut and doing just fine.

I am and I'll have my son's cut when the time comes. No reason in particular though.

I am and I would most likely do it to my son. I know its not hurting anything, but it was one less thing to think about. If my wife has a valid argument or just doesn't want it done then I'll leave him uncut.

No, I am not cut, nor will I butcher my child like that. I'll leave that to the sickies.

If there is no reason, why do it?

Im cut and I would do it to my children. I have many reasons, cleanlisness amoung them. Personnaly I find people like the above poster (Prince) obnoxiouse, your not butchering them. Do you want to clean the gunk out of an old mans dick? Well thats what nurses have to do and apparently its one of the most horrible jobs possible. Ill do it for vanity, cleanliness and saving someones sanity.

Okay, first of all, there is no proven health advantage to circumcision. It is based on religion, period. Second, why do you ask if I want to "clean the gunk out of an old man's dick"? What does that have to do with anything? As for nursing, if you can't wipe an old man's arse either then you picked the wrong profession, did you not?

I have two sons.
Neither are circumsized.
Keeping a foreskin clean is roughly the same amount of work as keeping a vulva clean.
As in any medical procedure, there is a risk of a mistake. Yeah statistically small, but some poor kids are part of those statistics. Would you want your son to be improperly cut?
Circumcision is not medically neccesary. A brand new being comes into this world & one of the first things we do is inflict pain on him? WTF?

For people talking about uncut cocks getting dirty:

I would say, since you are here...with access to a computer & the Internet ...reading this...you can clean your cock well enough that cleanliness is not an issue. If your situation does not allow you to clean your penis well enough that you would get infections, YOU ARE ONE DIRTY FREAK and circumcision should not one of your top priorities.

In other words, the cleanliness argument for circumcision is BS. How about respecting a kid's body as if he were actually human.

Good God.

Halx has it totally correct when he says that people will always gravitate to justifying and choosing again, their 'choices' of the past.

circumcision could be justified completely on health grounds maybe,100 years ago? it was debatable 50 years ago.

Today, with the standards of cleanliness the general populations of first world countries have adopted, there's NO health reason to be cut.

FACT.

The only reasons you're mutilating - for that is what it is, a socially accepted mutilation - the flesh of your infant son, is either that you had it done, so it's good enough for your son or for your own religious beliefs.

The first reason is, of course, stupid. The second reason, of course, is debatable.

I think it's incredibly sad that you violate the intactness(?) of your baby child, as well as removing a rather fabulous source of sexual pleasure from your son, WITHOUT HIS INFORMED CONSENT, forever.

Home correction, drink driving, arbitrary execution and imprisonment, women's disenfranchisement, slavery, racism and indeed female circumcision.

All, to a greater or lesser degree, are barbaric practices that are being, or have been, wiped out. Things can and should change.

Circumcision is outdated and outmoded, inflicted on babies for nonsensical, social reasons.

It's barbaric.

It's abuse.

wow. THAT made me feel like shit.

i am, and my two sons are. the main reason my wife & i chose to go with circumcision was not religious. we just thought it would be confusing to explain why daddy looks different from son #1. once that decision was made, it just kind of followed for #2 for the same reason, except now more so (daddy AND my big brother are different?).

had i known how traumatic it would be sending my boys away to be cut on their second day in this world, i probably wouldn't have done it.

yeah its cleaner, but it feels better with it on.

so no
and no

edit: but its an outdated argument for it, its not needed at all. we have come so far in this world that you can pefectly well keep your dick a clean dick without any problem. and for the post up there that said it would be too sensitive.. no way... no way.. it feels better.. but dont make up some illusion of extrem pleasure to reason why its being taken (chopped) off. and as good as everyone with an european background (in europe), besides jews, does not have their foreskin sliced away. and taking it away is just stupid... really... especialy because its done at birth, if you find a reason for it when you grow up, then do it.. but dont do it to a kid thats too you to choose for himself.

No and no.

People don't do things like that over here, simply because there is no reason why we should. And honestly, mutilating your own sons sexual organ without his consent... tisonlyi basically says it all. It's barbaric.

No

i like to play with my foreskin
adds fun to recieving a blowjob also

see no reason for doing it. nor for my children. if he wants to do it once he's an adult, cut away boy :)

If I remember correctly, Mr.S wasn't cut until later in life... like his early teens or something. He has a lot of scar tissue from that. I know that he wishes that he wasn't cut.

Before I decided to spend the rest of my life with Mr.S, I was intending on having my sons cut. Why? Cuz everybody else is doing it, and I didn't want them to feel weird or different. Mr.S has given me a different perspective.

They're going to feel different anyway, simply because of their advanced intelligence and startling good looks. :)

I was a certified nursing assistant in high school and I had to clean an uncut old guy every day. It wasn't any dirtier than the other dicks I had to clean. Just different. Sure, I fumbled a bit the first time, but once I got used to how the foreskin could be pulled back, it was simple.

So I vote no. It's not a necessary procedure. It's quite silly actually.

1) No i dont beleive i should make the choice for him
2) No, i think it has its advantages

1) No - It's cosmetic surgery and I'd rather give any son I might have in the future the choice. It can be done anytime; it can't really be undone.

2) Doesn't apply - I'm intact.

you need to settle down just a little. i know not everyone is a smart and well informed as you are so just give us little people with our small minds a chance.

my wife and i debated this for 8 months. we both went back and forth. we went to websites, read books, articles, talked to every friend we had who had a boy. i have 2 friends who are circumsized who didn't do it to their boys.

here's what it came down to.

I had a good friend of mine whose boy had a problem with his foreskin at 3 and had to have a circumcision: try telling a 3 year old to not touch his penis at 3. I read about this a few more times and it was just barely enought to tilt the wagon.

they used a topical pain killer, allowed me to hold my son's hand. (i promised i wouldn't look so i wouldn't pass out)

i don't think any of the sad feelings i have in my life are left over feelings of anger at my parents for mutilating me.

the study about sexual pleasure is old and has been disproven. seriously. let's have a poll all guys who are circumcized who have a problem enjoying sex. anyone having a hard time getting aroused? didn't think so. women... do you wish your man was more sensitive and finished even quicker. hmmmm

i really understand your point and your passion about this subject. i tell everyone that it's a hard decision and that they need to do their own research and come to a conclusion they'll be comfortable with.

if the original poster is considering this for their son then good luck and i hope your child is born healthy and well. it's was the greatest moment in my life.

right on.

Nice choice.

You discussed and read widely, good.

I don't know what you read, but I imagine all the books based on facts, not old wives tales, social pressures and ridiculous scaremongering, leant quite heavily in the direction of leaving well alone.

flying in the face of everything else, at least every other piece of objective info i've ever read on the subject, you choose to blow one case your hear about, 2nd hand, totally out of proportion and so choose to go with the post natal mutilation, rather than letting well alone and, oh i don't know, perhaps properly washing (which would involve directly touching) the penis of your son.

Your son might, just might, get meningitis. Better rip out his spinal column and drain the fluids that bathe his brain, eh?

Oh, that's not palatable?

he will get nappy rash, which is uncomfortable, so the skin on his arse should be removed, eh?

He stands a good chance of breaking a bone while he's under ten years of age, best make him a quadriplegic, that'll sort those tiresome troubles of worrying what little scrapes your child might get into...

It's mutilation. Plain and simple. You're disfiguring your child on the OFFCHANCE that, most likely through prudishly shying away from pulling the foreskin of your child back and washing him properly, you MIGHT have to go through some surgery or other with him.

Heaven forbid.

Jesus man, do you know what state a foreskin has to get into before it's necessary to cut it off?

Just think about it.

How diseased, how filthy, how rank, how progressed before medical presentation does a piece of flesh have to get such that the only recourse is amputation?

Not antisceptic creams? no pills? no nurse taking your son into a corner and carefully cleaning and dressing the affected area, followed by a jab and an appointment to come back in 2 days?

No no, straight to amuptation.

Pretty, pretty damn bad.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that save the most extremely remote, chance, freak happening that a properly cared for child could ever find itself in that situation.

I'm sorry, I'm european. Pretty much all of us over here are uncut, and most of my friends like to talk about the disasters they have down there after a few pints, lets face it, we all have one or two during our lives. Most entertaining anecdotes over a spot of luncheon.

The only person i know who has been medically ordered into circumcision is my own father. I have to inform you, the state he got his penis into was, well, absolutely hideous. Beyond the comprehension of a standard human male as to how he could let it degenerate to such a state...

I read around this issue when, living in a foreign land where nudity was perfectly acceptable in certain places, an american associate of mine noted with a look of disgust that:

"You guys must be stinkin down there, goddamn freakish."

Followed by an arguement and a long running dispute - where he eventually had to throw away long and dearly held beliefs of self image and oh, i dunno... bizarre ideas of superiority through reduction, etc, etc...

In reading around, I couldn't believe the ridiculous arguements put forward in favour of what is, in all honesty and medical fact, nothing more than a barbaric status quo.

A throwback to less cleanly times, perhaps.

Nothing More.

Oh, and on the sexual sensation front, i wasn't trying to say that you cut chaps don't feel anything. Of course you do. What I was saying is that I enjoy, in fact a little more than just enjoy, having my foreskin played with, touched and licked. Other intact males i've discussed it with feel similarly.

The feeling of having one's lady put her tongue betwixt foreskin and glans and move around is rather, umm, nice... as is the sucking and nibbling action....

I digress, save to say, those small but wonderful pleasures are now totally denied to your son for his entire stay on planet earth, of which he has but one.

Hey, you're his daddy and must know your gene pool far better than I. What that little lad needs, not knowing what the hell he's going through, and just starting to build his most lasting and most important connections to the outside world, might just be a nice dose of unnecessary, random torture.

That'll definitely shove him off on the right footing.

Well done you.

-------

Yes, I know it's only a small flap of skin, not a lot to get boiling about but the anger comes from the irrational belief that underlies and provokes the mutilation.

Amputation. Mutilation. Disfigurement. Abuse.

A fancy medical name shouldn't hide what it really is.

I did absolutely not circumsize my baby boys.

I am cut and wish I weren't. I still remember the trauma I felt when I overheard my parents talking about having my younger brother's done. I was in shock that they had inflicted something like this on me and I had no say. Needless to say this attitude has not changed since that first moment till now.

The whole "why am I different from Dad ?" argument never flys with me either. Kids ask that about all sorts of things. "Why is my skin white/black?", Why am I taller/shorter than the other kids?",etc. I feel comfortable telling my boys all about circumcision when they ask, talking about it seems like no big deal.

Since I don't want kids, I haven't really thought about this. But if I were to have a kid, I think I would leave it be. I'd rather give the kid a choice in the matter instead of circumsize him based on my personal preferences.

I think some of you people are overreacting to other people's decisions. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, even if it is less educated in your eyes. No opinion is right or wrong or better than someone else's.

Yes.

Each individual is entitled to their own decisions and choices.

Are we not individuals from the moment we're brought into this world?

tisonlyi, a point well taken, a very passionate one at that, but i feel you need to leave other people to their own decisions. You may argue with that very same passion, but perhaps do it so your words are a little less pointed in the direction of any one in particular.

dtheriault, classy response, you stated your case excellently.

I'll add my bit once again: Bathing your kid properly is a big deal. Do this and you'll probably reduce your kid's chances of infection by about 99%, when his chances are all ready statistically low.

When you go on a rollercoaster, you dont amputate your arms and legs just because they might fly outside the cart and get messed up. When you're born, you shouldn't get part of your HOLIEST OF HOLIES amputated just because it might get messed up on this rollercoaster of life. As with the real rollercoaster, you only get messed up if you're not responsible. Then, there's the small, tiny chance that the whole thing flies off the tracks, but why worry? Shit like that can't be planned for or prevented.

Fair enough Mr Halx, chief.

The word used to describe me by people who only met me in the flesh recently was 'intense'.

My new lady said it is absolutely spot on.

I should do more meditation.

My wife and I had been bantering this issue back and forth. Taking the second question first. I am. Now, I was never asked if I wanted this procedure but it's all I know. I do not know what I'm missing sexually and I have had unnecesary surgery with out consent. I should of had the opportunity as an adult to decide. The first question is a big no. However, if my wife and I ever have a son I'm sure it will be a hot debate. I will have her read this fourum so she can see real people react to this issue. With out a religous (can't change their minds and their sons will forever be subject to this) or documented medical reason this procedure should be as outlawed as female circumcision. The discussion here has only hardened my resolve.

Yes and yes.

And guess what?

I can happily live with both of those answers :D

No and no.
As mentioned, if it is mainly for reasons of health, you don't need to be circumcised to prevent infection. How many seconds does it take to pull back the skin, and rinse it in the shower?

You just have to educate and bathe your kids properly. When i was a kid, my dad made sure i cleaned behind the skin, and checked (like at the public showers at the swimming pool) etc...

And another GOOD reason to clean well now. I don't get a BJ unless its clean. so yes, i make sure its CLEAN!!!! good incentive hurh...

My parents didn't have me baptized, didn't have me forcibly confirmed in the church. They wanted me to have that decision.

It bugs me that they didn't give me the same choice about my penis. I can decide what's best for my spirit, but not for my body?

I love my parents more than anything in the world. Anything. This makes a little part of me not like them.

1. It's up to my son when he's older (only 10 months).
2. My wife and I love it the way it is. No surgery here!!!

I'm curious if you'd be making the same statement if we were discussing female pharonic circumcision. Do you really believe that every opinion is equally valid?

If you evaluated the opinions of these cultures by their own standards, what they are doing is perfectly valid. While I personally disagree with female circumcision, I don't feel I should force them to believe what I do. I hope that one day soon they change their views on this through education about hygiene and such. I don't think shoving my opinion down their throat is at all productive in any way.

(FGM info. for those curious about it)
http://www.religioustolerance.org/fem_cirm.htm


So my answer to that remains yes.

nothing left to say...tisonlyi said it all.

1) Yes
2) Yes

I found this thread interesting, so I asked my bf what he thought...
His exact words - "Is it free?"
tehe

I'd chop off one of my toes before I'd allow a child of my to be circumcized, and a big yes on undoing it for me.

I've actually wondered if I could file a malpractice suit over it. Not only do I think it's completely unnecessary, getting really hard gets painful after a few minutes because there just isn't enough skin there.

As for the cosmetic aspect, if I were to have it surgically restored, my estimate is that I would gain about 1.5-2 inches, not to mention that it looks and feels ridiculous to have my skin tenting out around the base. There are also visible marks from it. It's not a huge problem, but I'd rather not have a big brown ring around my penis.

I'm cut and I would never get my boy cut. I'm pissed at my parents for removing part of me.

1) Yes
2) Yes

On the female circumcision point.

Religious tolerance?

I'm sorry, how many outdated, idiotic, downright stupid positions in society have been defended as being either 'an essential part of the fabric of our society' or 'our birthright and sacred duty, handed to us by God, as X book/prophet said'.

Tosh.

YOU can have any opinion YOU like, so long as you can logically justify it (IMHO) AND IT CAUSES NO SERIOUS HARM TO OTHERS.

Female circumcision is beyond pretty much any other religious/social status quo in terms of barbarity. I can't believe anyone would say that people should be allowed their own views on this.

Hey, I think stupid people should be executed. I think the excessively egotistical should be chemically castrated and sent to special prisons for reprogramming. Both sets of people poison the lives of those of us who are the next step in evolution, get rid of them.

Palatable? Mais non.

Should people tolerate this view? Even if i say an invisible lever pulling chap in the sky with a white beard and booming voice told me that this is the way to go? Mais fucking non.

Sometimes, in fact not even sometimes, everytime, people in the first world have the moral responsibility to stamp out the barbarism of other cultures.

If a lady hits puberty and decides they'd like their newly discovered and rather pleasurable clitoris to be crudely ripped from their anatomical make-up, then fine. they can, kinda, make that 'choice'. Past a certain point and age.

A baby certainly cannot.

1) No
2) No

You don't cut off body parts that get dirty or even infected. You clean them and keep them clean from then on.

Do you pull a tooth when you get caries? Do you you remove your child's teeth in order to prevent caries ?

I'm cut, and i like it cut. I don't think i'm missing out on some big amazing secret not having a foreskin. In fact, i wouldn't have it any other way. So yeah, I'd have my son done.

thebiz.

"I don't know what i'm missing out on, but if it's good enough for me, then it's good enough for me to mutilate the one thing i should be protecting with every fiber of my being."

nice.

1. FGM is not performed for religious reasons.
2. My opinion is that other opinions are as valid as mine no matter how much I disagree with them. If that's how you feel, then fine, but I disagree. I think your opinion is ethnocentric. Does that make your opinion wrong? No, because it's your opinion. I'm holding to mine, and you're free to do the same.
3. FGM is performed as late as 15 years of age in some areas. So some do have a "choice," but if they don't get it their society often looks down upon them. FGM is performed because of social/cultural beliefs/pressures.
"The age at which a girl is subjected to this ranges from seven days old to young adulthood._ Most commonly, it is performed between 2 and 15 years of age."
http://www.fgm.org/TheBasics.html

Its becoming less and less common to get circumciscions. I think it was big for a while there, especially in the 70-80s, where Drs would recommend it. But nowadays, there have been reports that it could cause more problems than it solves, and it has been noted that a decrease in sexual sensitivity is linked to being cut, because the head(glans) of the penis becomes roughened, and losses its natural sensitivity.

Also, for adults who think they want to be cut, its not a good idea, just look up some websites about it, crazy shit can happen. Also, the penis may actually become dulled greatly among other things.

I'm cut and loving it. I'm also Jewish and loving it. Some would say these two are related.

I was cut at age 25, and i would do it again. So i have seen both sides. But either way it does'nt bother me. But if it was going to be done i think it should be done while there young. It was very hard not to get an erection at age 25. But really it did'nt hurt that bad. The hardest part was not having sex, and i was married at the time. But my doctor did a really nice job, my skin is'nt tight when im hard or any thing. In other words she left a little. I've seen where some guys have big scars, i dont have any scars. I think years ago doctors removed to much. But now they do much better. And by the way i did have my son circumsized.

I have 2 sons, both cut

I am glad my parents had me cut when I was too young to remember the pain :)

1. Yes
2. Yes

1 Yes ( our son is almost 3 ) and I dont think he hates me cause he is circumsized
2 Yes


You know what kinda cracks me up...... the people that stated that they are angry at their parents because they had them circumsized..... I don't know why but that strikes me as funny. If you were an infant , you dont remember when this happend to you... I cant imagine that you could miss foreskin. I think there is alot more to it then being mad at mom and dad for snippin ya.

tisonlyi

You've explained your feelings in depth.

There's no need to attack others who don't share them.

The reason I'm disappointed my parents got me cut is they did it for no good reason. We've talked about it as adults and they say they would never do it knowing what they know now. I have a fantastic relationship with my folks so being "mad" at them has nothing to do with it. You're right that it the big scheme it's probably no big deal, but making decisions based on ignorance always drives me nuts.

I think it's a big deal.. you lose part of your penis, the most important part of your body.

The penis is the most important part of your body?

Sorry, Hal, but I'll reserve that distinction for my mind.

1.Yes
2.I'm cut, have been from birth. If i had the choice to make it would be the same as I am right now.

The mind.. such a humanistic sentimentality :p

We're animals.. we reproduce. Can't reproduce without a willy.

I'm not cut and I most likely will not have my son cut should i have a son.

it IS a personal preference for a lot of people but i DO notice that a lot of the people (at least here) say they will get it cut because they are as well

for me thats simply not a good answer - i'd rather let him have a chance to decide himself when he is older rather than cut it after birth and not give him a chance

but thats me and i think its fine being uncut anyways - i don't knwo the exact stats out there but supposedly there are fewer and fewer people in the U.S. getting their sons cut - supposedly getting cut can be the minority in the future but who knows

and i will agree that a lot of the reason the kids get cut is often for no reason other than their father is

It so beautiful when cut, I have had the opprtunity to have it both ways, un-circed at birth snipped at 24 and have never looked back, and I was also at a BRIS this week!, CUT IT, CUT IT, I say.

As for the decision, I would dicuss it with galaxygirl, if/when that opportunity were to arise..

I am uncut...

I think the only problem i had with being uncut was the social acceptance. I am of Latin decent, and I lived in a predominantly Jewish and "hick" community of South Florida between Ft. Lauderdale and Miami, as a teenager... Once the kids my age found out i was uncircumcized, i was humiliated for being "abnormal". This encounter from the only kids i knew brought me to the point of considering a circumcision, to gain social acceptance, but it wasnt until having my first sexual encounters in high school that i gradually became comfortable with being uncut. Eventually I realized that I should be happy with my penis, and fortunate for what i have.

After my freshmen year in college, and exploiting my penis around campus to a few girl-friends, and getting praised for its size and looks, I COMPLETELY got over all of my complections about being uncut and my confidence has improved my sex life and desire 10 fold.

A few years have past since then and now, i can say that i wouldnt want my penis any other way. I am happy with being uncut, and i would DEFINITLY want my son (whenever i have one) to keep his foreskin as well.

I think with time, America will realize that circumcisions are outdated, and provide more of a health risk to recieve them, than getting an infection later on in life. I just think that unless you are jewish and get it done as part of a religous ritual or "bris" then the procedure should not be done. I think its unnessesary for a new born baby to go through that much pain and suffering. But thats just my opinion.

Uncut and happy...

dear tisonlyi:

so you basically accused me of being stupid, afraid to touch my son's penis to clean it and a mutilator.

cool... real nice.

like i said i read a lot:

things like: "The American Academy of Pediatrics concluded in 1989 that there may be "medical benefits and advantages" to circumcision. Urinary tract infection during the first year of life of uncircumcised boys is ten times that of their circumcised counterparts. Incidence of penile cancer is much lower in circumcised men (Science News, March 11, 1989, page 150). After study of incidence of AIDS in Africa, researcher Jean L. Marx concluded that uncircumcised men may be five to eight times more likely to get AIDS during heterosexual intercourse than men who have been circumcised (Science, August 4, 1989, pages 470-471).

Canadian Pediatric Society, March 16, 1996
"The overall evidence of the benefits and harms of circumcision is so evenly balanced that it does not support recommending circumcision as a routine procedure for newborns."

AAP Statement, March 1, 1999.
"Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In the case of circumcision, in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child."

I could go on and on the basic summary is this:

there are good and bad things about both and it's up to a parent to decide after research and discussion. like i said it wasn't an easy decision. i almost backed out at the last minute.

i know you euros are pretty smart, but not all of us heathen americans are the same.

my wife breast fed for almost 2 years not because it's easier, but because it more healthy.

we didn't leave him alone in his crib to "cry it out." we co-slept with him for a year because it's better for him.

we are vegetarian and so is he. he's at the 98th percentile for healthy growth and he's never been sick enough to go to the doctors (knock on wood)

we don't have cable tv, a dvd player, and he has more books than toys. we love our son and think we made the right decision.

i also gladly support anyone who thinks that they need to leave the foreskin intact, because that's fine with me.

i don't think that all opinions are valid. (hitler was wrong) i just think that this one is a little more gray than "ripping my son's spinal column out."

thanks for that image.

dt

I stopped reading at penile cancer.

Do you know the phrase "rare as hens teeth"?

Any figures for that one?

Here are the first one's google threw at me.

http://www.circumstitions.com/Cancer.html

Keep in mind that most penile cancers are secondaries due to spreading down through the urethra, either from the bladder or the prostate. Both cancers of older age (generally).

You quote that source twice.

I think you should look real hard at both of those pieces of 'research'.

Let me tell you, sir, I suffer from a very rare tumour in younger people. Choriodal melanoma. A tuma of the eye. hence the one eye gag in my sig.

Cancer is not a subject to bandied about as a political toy for idiotic social manipulators.

I'm moderately drunk, but the utter GARBAGE you just spouted, well, even my fuddled mind knows i don't have to take it point by point.

1 in a billion to 1 in 100 million, a 10 times greater risk.

Oh, i did go back and read the rest.

You think i'm a euro-supremacist?

On the issue of circumcision, you're damn right i am.

As for the rest of your moral indignation, i plonk that in the same trollish hole as motkadishu, or whatever's arguements on female circumcision.

I believe eric cartman said it best with:

"it's all a bunch of tree hugging hippy crap"

Wow, I'm apparently the only Jew on TFP.
As per my faith I am "cut" and as per my faith my son shall be "cut" as I am. Its a covenant with god thing, and hardly the weirdest most horrible thing that has been done in the name of religion.

It does offer Superior resistance to infection, which I will admit is not the worlds biggest advantage in our disinfectant ridden, shower every day- sometimes twice society. It was a *huge* advantage in the desert-wandering nomad, all the water I see I drink, if I wash at all its done by rubbing myself clean with sand, early Mediterranean lifestyle.

If it makes sex less pleasurable then I got to wonder how because It seems pretty fun the way it is to me.

in response to the firebrand of this discussion: tisonlyi perhaps its a bit barbaric, but I have never had a big problem with barbarism. Its not a horrible repressive thing, It does not significantly impair ones ability to function in any way. It is not a horrible human rights abuse. Think of it sort of like if tattooed a big heart on your baby's ass, its weird, but its not particularly abusive.
Mutilation is in the eye of the beholder, its no more or less mutilation than earrings, breast implants or a nose job.
Oh and the reason we don't cut off hands to prevent hand infections is twofold: 1) It significantly impairs the ability to function and 2) The hand is not particularly infection prone. You will notice that that we rip out both the appendix and the tonsils with hardly blink of the eye. Evolution isn't perfect, the body is still very much a work in progress (If you don't believe me take a look at your knees) so there is no reason to assume we can't tweak it a bit.

no
never

Yes to both. All the girls I've been with prefer a circumcised penis. they just feel it's a lot cleaner.

wow, thats pretty ignorant on their part

The last time I checked circumcision didn't mean castration.

Yes and Yes if i ever have a boy.

When I turned 18 I had myself circumsized. It was pretty neat. I was on the table and I watched the surgeon cut my penis and leave me enough room for growth. It was the best thing I did for my sex life and for my self esteem. I can whip out my helmet head and go to town and not be embarrased like before when my dick looked like a sausage with a turtleneck.

I won't have my son know the "joy" of smegma(if i ever even have kids).

tisonlyi:

you know what i thought about what you said and you're totally right.

i completely suck. i'm currently going to reassess most of my life right now. thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

thanks! I'm so glad i joined TFP if for no other reason than the change you've made in my life.

you rule.

I am circumcised, yet I chose to not circumsize my son (now one year old). To me it was a matter of logic. There is absolutely no reason to whack his lil' pee-pee. It started as a hygenic ritual (back when people didn't bathe) that turned into religious nonsense. It only looks "better" because that's what we're used to. In a culture where no-one is whacked, I bet a clipped dong looks totally gross.

Anyway, these days more and more parents are opting to not circumsize their sons. Good for them.. If you've ever seen the procedure it's absolutely horrible. They have to strap the kids down to a table so they don't squirm, and the screaming is horrible. I don't see how you could do this to a child you loved, especially when there is no good reason to do it in the first place.

i think this read is really getting out there sometimes seriously no need to be inulting or whatever - im pretty sure though most people already know who is oging to say what :D

anyways like SAM821 i always felt 'unaccepted' younger and wanted to be cut - but now as i get older i really prefer to keep it as it is

if you wash there should relaly be no reason to have an infection - and its so easy to do so i really see no reason why its going to get one 'easily'

and the women that say its dirty - well thats being ignorant on their part

now my self esteem is much better, before it went low to the point where i wanted to be cut, but now, i feel good about it and if women think its dirty because im uncut, then they need to get a clue

dtheriault:

Utterly defeated on points of fact, the knave resorts to low brow sarcasm.

You made a bad choice. You found evidence to back your own prejudice and ignored the overwhelming body of accepted FACT.

Your right, but you shouldn't fool yourself as to why you did it. It wasn't for health reasons.

75 years ago, i'm sure a reasonably intelligent man could find 'facts' to back up home correction.

150 years ago, there were many 'facts' flying around to justify the inferiority of the negro.

Times change.

Barbarity wilts in the face of reason.

Don't get angry at me for YOUR POOR DECISION.

giblfiz:

A Jewish person with a tolerance for barbarism, isn't there a word for that in today's world?

Zionist? (yes, my tongue is firmly in my cheek)

Even for you chaps, if you go back to your history, it was more about identification and unity than cleanliness. The original circumcision was far, FAR less intrsuive, only taking a small section of the skin, which could easily be streched.

That stretching took place in areas under greek control where athletes would perform in the nude, with Jews being ridiculed for their lack of a full foreskin. Some athletes underwent procedures like hanging weights and stuffing the inside, etc to restore them to nature and remove the insults and sniping.

Obviously, your ancestors didn't like that at all, decreeing that from then on, all Jewish boys would have a full circumcision.

Which is utterly brutal, barbaric, and in your culture done without any kind of anaesthetic, unless i'm mistaken?

As for the tonsil and appendix points... irrelevent. diseased, dangerous, medically must be removed (currently - that will change at some point in the future, unless we wipe ourselves out.)

My hand point was valid, as there is NO VALID, RATIONAL, REASON TO REMOVE A HAND OR A FORESKIN AT BIRTH. (defects and complications aside)

Religious reasoning, well, I don't agree. personally. The child should be left to make that decision at a later date, like, when he's in command of the full facts and at an age when he could possibly do something like, oh i don't know... MAKE A REASONED CHOICE.

Who knows, the little lad might just turn out to be an atheist who enjoys the aesthetics and pleasures of an intact penis.

If he's lucky, which, being born to you, he wasn't.

i find it somewhat telling how many of the "1.Yes 2.Yes" people can be so cavalier about genital mutilation. Most of the "No" people (and only a few of the yessers) explain their beliefs. That indicates that they've thought through their positions. I'm not saying that people who choose yes didn't think it through, just saying there isn't much evidence of forethought.

and a note about FGM:

How voluntary is it when a lot of the girls who are mutilated don't want to be?

Sure, society may mistakenly think that male circumcision is healthy, but it ultimately should be a personal choice. Somehow I think people would be a little concerned if a boy's father, uncles, and cousins dragged him out of his home by force and circumcised him THEMSELVES against his will.

That happens sadly far too often to young women in africa, and since the female genital MUTILATION (it's called mutilation for a reason, people) is performed by a non-professional (often an untrained family member) more than a few poor girls bleed to death.

Letting people make their own decisions is generally a good idea. It doesn't bother me which IPU someone chooses to worship every sunday, but when it comes to assault on other people, that's where we should step in and help.

1. No, and Im glad my parents never did it. Its just about TOO easy to clean, and you can have plenty of fun with the foreskin.

2. No, I never will have my son cut, when I have one.

Hrothgar:

You got yourself circumcised at an appropriate age. go you.

even if you did do it to 'fit in'.

In a society of the mutilated i'm not sure that as a teenager I'd have been able to stick it out.

Weak pun intended.

I hope you see the irony of these two comments together. I am always doubtful of of any fact that is spelled in all caps. Rather than screaming perhaps you should sight your support.

I'm pretty sure that I was intended to ignore that, so I will

Well I can speak rather authoritatively on the issue of circumcision originally being a) far less intrusive and b) for Identification. These items are both fully false, it was clearly a full circumcision (Ugg, Ill dig through my Hebrew studies book for a ref. if you really care) And it was clearly not for ID and Unity... for one thing almost everyone in the region did it at the time, it was a health necessity. (A Journey through the Hebrew Scriptures by Frank S. Frick) As I pointed out in my post, if you don't have water to wash with circumcision becomes a major boon to survival. This is something I have studied formally and which I am rather certain of.

I will admit that I don't know much about the Israelite interaction with the greeks in greek controlled areas, its something I have never studied. I am quite frankly surprised to hear that Jews were allowed to compete at all.

No, we use the worlds oldest anesthetic, wine. Works rather well. It also appears from reading this discussion that our professional moyals seem to be much better at performing circumcisions than the average doctor.

I find it surprising that you don't at least see how a foreskin bears more resemblance to a tonsil than to a hand. I assume that your simply being stubborn for rhetorical purposes.

I find the idea that parents should be forced to raise their children as the culture sees fit rather than as the parent sees fit often on TFP. I imagine that you will be able to garner quite a bit of support for this sentiment. Suffice to say that my people have fought (or more often fled) and died for the right to raise our children as we see fit. The majority does not necessarily know how to raise children well, and the tyranny of the majority can be just as oppressive as the inquisition ever was.

I don't take kindly to being insulted. Few here do. If you must insult me please make it either comical or subtle. You will note that I did not call you a "mean face" or any other expletive, nor have I criticized you directly.

Hmm unless you later had your circumcision after loosing your virginity how could you say how sensitive it would or wouldnt be?

I'm cut, but my wife and I are struggling with the decision to cut any sons that we might have. To us, the decision will probably be based on what we think the locker room will look like when our boy is a teenager- I don't think we care one way or the other as long as he looks like the rest of the boys. I remember when I was in junior high there was one kid in my gym class that was uncut and the teasing he indured was brutal.

As for the arguments about circumcision being barbaric, I'm not so sure. My penis works just fine, and considering what I went through (birth) the day before my skin was cut, I'd say it was probably the least of my worries.

1) No.
2) Doesn't apply.