Your sexual preference for circumcised penises aside, the genitals you chose to have cosmetically, functionally, permanently and surgically altered belong to your son. He may grow up to have preferences different from yours. His future lovers may have preferences different from yours. Your husband's preference differed from yours. As a woman who has been fortunate to have both intact and circumcised lovers, I can assure you that my preferences differ from yours.For the rest of the story, see Dr. Momma. If you are in the Houston area and want to know more about circumcision education, request to 'check out' my Circumcision Packet from the lending library.
Key men in my life would also beg to differ; my partner thanked his mother for "letting him keep" his foreskin. My brother wishes that our parents had told the doctor to leave his alone. It pains me to think about how different his introduction to life outside the womb was from mine, and how I got to keep the body I was born with, but he did not. Circumcised boys will never know what it's like to have a whole sex organ. They will never experience the full range of pleasure they were meant to have, and are likely to lose sensation as they age. Countries with lower rates of circumcision have lower rates of ED. The sensitive glans, meant to be an internal organ and protected by the foreskin, grows calloused from years of rubbing against fabric, and the most sensitive areas of the penis, such as the frenulum, are amputated in circumcision.
As for wanting your son to fit in, a significant percentage of parents are now choosing to "bring their whole baby home," which means many of your son's peers will be au naturale. The stigma around having one's whole penis is fading - as well it should! Why should human bodies in their natural form garner distaste?
As for sexual health (which should be a non-issue for babies and little boys) I recommend that you examine the studies that show that the incidence of sexually transmitted infections is lower in circumcised men. The statistical methodology is flawed. In fact, the rates of HIV infection are higher in the United States, where more sexually active men are cut than in similarly developed regions where intact men are the majority, such as in Europe.
Pages
▼
Someone linked your post and I left this reply. Thought it might be (hopefully) constructive to leave it here as well. I get a bit passionate and really don't intend to offend.
ReplyDeleteOn a more serious note, here's a study that seems to suggest that circumcision is good for boys and men. http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=17415&fb_source=message
I do not and am not aware of anyone who feels mutilated. Some liberals seem to have decided that circumcision is an evil that must be stopped, regardless of the culture of those that do it. This is the same type of behavior that is derided when conservatives try to prevent people from having gay sex or when people tried to civilize native americans by removing them from their primative parents and educating them properly. If my religion says that I should do something you had better have some pretty good evidence when you come knocking on my door and telling me what to do in my own life. As far as I can tell the evidence on circumcision may even support the practice. Be careful on this road. It leads to political and/or cultural fascism.
"I do not and am not aware of anyone who feels mutilated." - And here we differ. I have spoken to many men who DO feel upset, that they lost something without consent, etc...
ReplyDelete"Some liberals seem to have decided that circumcision is an evil that must be stopped, regardless of the culture of those that do it." - liberal? Nope. I simply believe that genital integrity is something that we should respect. It's not MY body, so I should not permanently alter it without the consent of the person whom I am doing it to. BTW, you might be interested in this then: http://wonderfullymadebelliesandbabies.blogspot.com/2011/09/how-do-you-decide.html. If you thought THIS post was hard to swallow, you will have a hayday with that other I just linked. I'm very VERY aware of the cultural reasons for doing it, but it doesn't change that this is a human rights issue - we should not have a right to amputate a part of our child's body just because they are OUR child... If there was even a minute amount of evidence showing that cutting off my child's eyelids would save them from a potential disease, should I run out and cut off his eyelids? Or would I be considered a mutilator?
"This is the same type of behavior that is derided when conservatives try to prevent people from having gay sex or when people tried to civilize native americans by removing them from their primative parents and educating them properly.".... huh?
Again.. huh? gay sex? that is an ADULTS choice on his/her own body. Not my say... removing a native person from their culture to educate them in public schools? Reprehensible because you loose a body of KNOWLEDGE... those are completely different in and of themselves... and totally NOT like circumcision in any way. If you wanted to be more on-target, you would say it is likened to when Americans said that slicing off the clitoral hood was immoral and they made it illegal... and when you compare those two, I will say you are right - they are exactly alike and they are equally reprehensible and wrong! We SHOULD make MGM illegal, IMHO... but since it will probably never come to that, I am happy to give true and accurate information... not drivel from a second-rate s/cite.
"If my religion says that I should do something you had better have some pretty good evidence when you come knocking on my door and telling me what to do in my own life." - no no! Far be it from me to tell you what to do with your OWN life, you're right! :) I wouldn't dare tell you what to do with your OWN life or body... but I WILL tell you when something completely and permanently altering should not be allowed to be done to ANOTHER PERSON without their consent.
"Be careful on this road. It leads to political and/or cultural fascism." ... no. Saying you have a right to make that decision for someone else's body is facist... that your ideology is so correct that you have a right to force it on your child's body. :( So sad! :(
cont...
ReplyDeleteYour pointed study is much disproven, by and large, by other studies... take a look
The question of HIV warrants further study. Although there is an apparent geographical correlation between male non-circumcision and HIV infection on the African continent, this is not true globally, and the pattern seen in Africa could easily be due to other factors.The only known effective means of preventing HIV infection are fidelity, condom use and abstinence. (http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/, http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/vincenzi/, Guimaraes M, Castilho E, Ramos-Filho C, et al. Heterosexual transmission of HIV-1: a multicenter study in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. VII International Conference on AIDS. Florence, June 1991 [abstract MC3098], and http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/HIVStatement.html)
In regards to UTI reductions? there is a great discrepancy, including how man cleans his penis as being more of an indicator for possible UTIs, forceful retraction, etc.... and I can go on and on.. for a good breakdown of the literature, see here: http://parentingconnection.wordpress.com/2011/05/15/circumcision-the-whole-truth/ or http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/ama2000/ (with resources and cited sources you can read through yourself).
For the poster who is supporting circumcision on infants: You are totally right in saying no one should be knocking on your door telling you what to do in "your" religion.......but what about the baby? Does the baby have any rights...especially to his whole body? Your religion stops where another human beings body begins....period. Practice what you want in your own religion....but don't be promoting the practice of out dated blood rituals that include cutting the healthy normal genitals of infant boys, who may or may not grow up to embrace your particular religious beliefs and practices!~ His Body = His choice means just that, the genitals belong to the baby, not the parents and certainly NOT anyone's religion. You are not smarter than nature, either, nature (or God if that is what you believe) sends baby boys into this world with all the body parts he is supposed to have for very good reasons. Foreskin is functional and a normal natural part of a baby boys anatomy. Do some research into the functions of the foreskin, please.
ReplyDeleteIn all of the decisions that I've made over the past year, leaving the birth center with ALL of my son is not one that I have or will ever question. If I have another son, he will not be circumcised either. Best to let him decide.
ReplyDeleteGreat replies Nicole! you are right, research shows there are no benefits to circumcision.
ReplyDeleteOr think of it this way- use common sense. A healthy perfect baby should not have an elective surgery done, one that is largely cosmetic!
-Julie Lucas
What about women, howare they benifitting from female circumcision? Articles extolling the benefits of female circumcision were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in the 1950's and Blue Cross Blue Shield paid for it until 1976. Women missing their foreskins should just be happy and appreciate their improved cleaner genitals.
ReplyDeleteSame for men.
Many men feel a part of them is missing once they realize their foreskin was amputated. Some find help doing restoration of their missing foreskin. This is no more exclusive to liberals than breast reconstruction surgery after mastectomy would be. In fact many people of very diverse backgrounds make up the children's rights intactivist movement.