This is usually a very touchy subject, but one that I cover with
the families that I work with. I never used to, but I have found about
1/2 of the families that do circumcise end up regretting it. SO.. with
that said.. I hope I don't offend.
Below, you will find some information I share with clients and friends.
Additionally, there are some great video resources to take a look at.
Penn & Teller Documentary- a humorous (and very colorfully embellished) video on circumcision and good solid information about it. It shows a GRAPHIC circumcision at 2:02-2:11 and 19:49-19:56.. other than that, there is no other procedures shown. 22:37-23:40 and 24:13-18 shows an adult restored foreskin and 23:40-23:52 shows a topless woman. Sorry, lots of disclaimers.
Function of the Prepuce - an educational piece on the biological and sexual function of the foreskin.
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.
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.
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.
I recently got in a rather heated discussion with a nurse.
The argument, after I compared female and male circumcision, declined to this:
"A direct comparison was made between male circumcision and female genital mutilation. The two acts were conflated. Female mutilation is a purposeless and barbaric act performed by evil men who comit this atrocity to keep women as second-class citizens.
The only conclusion that can be drawn when a direct relationship is made between female mutilation and male circumcision is that they are equally atrocious.
And if the two acts are the same (remember, they were directly compared), someone who sees a benefit to male circumcision is by definition just as evil as someone who supports female genital mutilation. If female mutilation and male circumcision are truly exactly the same, then anyone who favors either act must be an equally repugnant person." - Nursing Student
Obviously, she is horrified at the idea of female circumcision but very much in favor of male circumcision.
Which leads me to this post. I'll make it short and sweet...
Which child is protected by current law to have part of their genitalia cut off? Which child is protected by current law to have their genitalia preserved?
Which child's parents would be considered barbaric by the majority of the population if they circumcised the child? Which child's parents would be offered the option before leaving the hospital because it is culturally accepted?
Which child's parents have a right to decide if they should have a healthy part of their body excised? Which child's body is less deserving of their natural state?
Which child's genitalia is more likely to be permanently altered because of religion, cultural acceptance, aesthetic appearance, or 'health reasons'?
You and I both know the answers to these questions. I would encourage you to take a look at the chart that I created below. Feel free to share at will, just give a link back or reference me as a source.
It is amazing what we can justify when it fits our personal paradigms and wants/desires.
As you all know, I speak out on some less-than-comfortable subjects. Now, this post may offend some. If you are one of the offended, just skip over this post and read the ones that don't offend.
BUT, but, I feel this is an important subject. We did not circumcise our son, and we don't believe in routine circumcision. For more on that, see the list below:
The point of this post, though, is to bring attention to some recent stirrings on the internet about foreskins and the intact penis. So, without further ado, here is my list of noteworthy links:
A DICK THING TO DO - a humorous but honest look at one families discussion about circumcised and intact penises.
AB768 HEARING - a great bit of information on the California bill re: forced infant male circumcision.
INTACT OR CIRCUMCISED - a mature-audience only discussion on the difference in adult penises. Educational to say the least.
I LOVE FORESKIN - a very intimate look at how circumcision doesn't only affect the man, but others whom he will encounter throughout life.
This is a topic that raises strong emotions on both ends of the spectrum. In fact, this topic has been known to divide households, spouses/partners, and long-term friendships. But, the fact remains, this topic needs to be discussed more.
There is a newer movie out called "Cut", and I highly recommend taking an hour to watch it. It is one of the best I have seen.
There is also a great article that I just came upon called When Intact, Don't Retract... what a great catchy line, and what great information it gives on the intact male and how to care for intact babies.
For my clients, if, after watching the movie above, you have additional questions, I am more than happy to share our journey through this subject, answer your questions as well as possible, and will lend out additional resources (articles, studies, and videos) to help you make a more informed choice.
Our hands can be used to harm, to heal, to love, to punish, to communicate, to nurture, or to work. As a doula, my hands are skilled in relief and respite. As an educator, my hands are used to communicate and to demonstrate. As a midwife, my hands will be used to catch and console.
Hands are powerful.
This is the first post in a series about hands. Mothers, doulas, midwives, educators, and nurses hands - they all speak for themselves - stories of regret, forgiveness, empowerment, and love.
To start our series, let's talk about the hands of a nurse who was willing to stand up to what she knew was wrong - ethically, morally, and bodily. A nurse who put her job and her future as a healer on the line to speak for those who could not speak.
This might not be what you had in mind when you think of the hands of a nurse, but her words are powerful enough that, I believe, she needs to be heard.
Her actions, and others like hers, are what has resulted in U.S. circumcision rates falling from 56% in 2006 to 33% in 2009. Thank you Mary.
Look at these hands.
These hands have taken a newborn baby from his mother’s safe warm breast and his father’s sheltering arms, and these hands have tied this baby to a cold hard platter and served him up to the circumciser.
These hands have readied the scalpel, even as they caressed the brow of the terrified baby as he struggles for freedom and searches my eyes for compassion he will not find.
A tortured being has sucked frantically on this finger in a hopeless effort to end the agony as his flesh – his birthright – is ripped from him and thrown in the garbage.
These hands have removed the diaper painfully adhered to the feces-covered wound between his chubby legs.
These hands have shielded my ears from his screams.
Nurses of America, I did not become a nurse to hurt babies, and neither did you.
In 1992, with over 20 other nurses at St. Vincent Hospital in Santa Fe, New Mexico, I gave notice to my employers and declared I would no longer be an accomplice in the atrocity that is infant circumcision.
I have reclaimed my tattered soul and begun the process of becoming whole again.
I am a conscientious objector in the war against our infant brothers and sons and it feels wonderful.
Nurses of America, wipe the blood from your hands and join me!
- By Mary Conant, R.N., Statement to the press May 25, 1994, Third International Symposium on Circumcision, University of Maryland.
Mary Conant is a co-founder of Nurses for the Rights of the Child. She is one of the original 24 Conscientious Objectors to Circumcision nurses at St. Vincent Hospital, Santa Fe, New Mexico. She also appears on Barry Ellsworth’s video documentary The Nurses of St. Vincent: Saying No to Circumcision.
What would you think if those who were entrusted to protect our children's health and uphold our children's physical integrity decided that it was ok to remove part of your daughters sexual organs if it saved them from another surgery to remove part of those same sexual organs in a less sterile and thus, more risky, procedure in another country that would allow it.
It doesn't matter that it is wrong, it doesn't matter that it is not the girl's choice because she has been indoctrinated to believe it is necessary, that she is old enough to say no. It doesn't matter that it is a permanent procedure that alters her body with very real and possible risks to her childbearing and overall health long-term, not to mention the emotional scarring: distrust, sexual disfunction, and so much more...
What would you think if the American Academy of Pediatrics condoned this?
Immigrant families that wish to preserve their local traditions sometimes approach Western doctors to perform FGC on their daughters. In its new report, the AAP advises doctors to inform families that the procedure is medically unnecessary and even dangerous. Should the families be resolute, the AAP raises the idea of legalizing a less-severe ritual cutting - akin, the policy statement says, to an "ear piercing" - to dissuade parents from sending their daughters to be circumcised in their home country, where medical conditions are likely to be far worse.
Even the title of the article irks and sickens me... 'Nicks' that are likened to an 'ear piercing'??? C'mon, call it what it is: genital mutilation... or, to be a little more PC, we can call it female circumcision.. because, as we can tell from their reasons for FMG, the cultures and religions where this is routine practice will not be quelled by a 'ritualistic nick'..
Thankfully, the entire piece is not a rally to show support of this proposition.
"Encouraging pediatricians to perform FGM under the notion of 'cultural sensitivity' shows a shocking lack of understanding of a girl's fundamental right to bodily integrity and equality," says Taina Bien-Aime, executive director of the human rights organizationEquality Now. "If foot-binding were still being carried out, would the AAP encourage pediatricians to execute a milder version of this practice?"
It angers and sickens me. Sure, it's barbaric, but it's also unsafe... so let's just make it more safe and less barbaric, that makes it ok!!?!
Another great video that I just had to reference. This is a completely PG video on youtube, where one college student talks about his foreskin and experience being intact.
And yet another (again PG) that talks about a man's experience, sexually, before and after his circumcision.
This week marks the 17th anniversary of Genital Integrity Awareness Week. The event was established to coinicide with the anniversary on March 30th of the federal law against Female Genital Mutilation and the beginning of Child Abuse Prevention Month (which occurs each April), to bring awareness to the fact that infant circumcision is risky, painful, harmful, medically unnecessary, and unethical.
During the week, activists in favor of ending infant circumcision will be gathering at 9 a.m. each day on the west lawn of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC to show their support for bringing an end to infant circumcision in this country.
UPDATED! At 4 p.m. on Tuesday, March 30, the March Against Infant Circumcision will begin, with activists marching to the White House. Representatives of Intact America will be there flying an Intact America banner (see below), urging legislators to stop infant circumcision. More information is available here.
Additionally, there is a wonderful article written by a father on his very difficult (and painfully honest) talk with his son about sex, genital integrity, and coming of age.
