Strollerderby

"One mother went so far as to compare circumcision to female genital mutilation."

How is it different? It was created as a means to dull sexual felling, to lessen masturbation. There is no medical reason for the procedure. Countries that ave conducted studies to show that circumcised males are less likely to contract aids and other std's are leaving out the socioeconomic status of the family who can afford an elective surgery on their males, and would not contract these infections due to their education and use of condoms, it has nothing to do with the circumcision. It is archaic, and it IS genital mutilation. It is sad that it still occurs in the US, or that some can even make an argument for it. It is an awful horrible procedure, it causes the baby a tremendous amount of pain, and it serves no purpose.The baby has no rights over his own body when his parents choose to circumcise him, and that is more than unethical. If you have a son who is circumcised, or are thinking about it, you should watch this video:www.youtube.com/watch

Would you allow a labiaplasty to be performed on an infant girl? Or even tolerate a pin prick to her genitals? Then why.........?????

I was one of those people who were on the fence. It seemed like there was evidence on both sides. We decided not to circumcise because I don't like to do medical procedures unless there is a good reason.

That being said, I would never say it was necessarily a bad thing to do. This is very different from, say, vaccines, where all of the scientific evidence points so strongly to vaccinating your children. I have lived in the US (most men are circumcised that are my age) and in Europe (most men are not). I would say these men are equally stable and have healthy sexual relationships.

It is the same as female genital mutilation. Circumcision was designed to make sex less pleasurable and to stop boys masturbating. The foreskin which is removed is very sensitive, has a number of nerve endings, and protects the penis, helps to keep it clean, and also has an important function in sexual pleasure. If we were doing this to girls int his country, there would be no question about the archaic bestiality of this procedure. The circumcised penis has to and does develop a callous around the head to help do some of the the function the foreskin needed to do. Men can not masturbate as often as they would like with as much pleasure as they would like if they are circumcised, maybe we can joke about this, but if this was done to women in this country we would be up in arms. We have to respect the human body, we have to respect autonomy over ones body. If we want to end genital mutilation for little girls, we have to stop doing it to our boys. Look up the history of the procedure, even in modern religious contexts, it is still about reducing sexual pleasure. It is wrong, it should be illegal. There is just a sliver of a females clitoris removed and sewn up in female circumcision, the process is less painful actually, and serves the same purpose. I can't believe the author of this post could be so trite, and educate herself so little about this subject.  

I think that if Daphne feels that way, she certainly shouldn't have her son circumcised. However, her anger towards others might be better worked off by serving food at a homeless shelter or something similar.

Anyone who is ridiculous enough to compare female genital mutilation to a simple circumcision knows nothing about the  issue.

Comparing FGM to circumcision is a slap in the face to the girls who have been subjected to it.  The purpose is to desexualize women and girls.  You may not like circumcision and you may chose not to have your sons circumcised, but stop with the hyperbole.  

These are the same people who claim they feel just like the Jews in 1940s Germany when they get cut off in traffic.  

We modify our bodies all the time to remove primitive adaptations- we remove our tonsils and adenoids, remove our third molars, get braces, extract appendixes, etc.

You don't need to have the foreskin removed, but it does not ruin any one's life, and if the boy in question is that distraught over pain that he won't remember, it is entirely possible to reclaim the foreskin---ie grow a new one.

Its a personal choice, and narrow minded women like that Daphne are exactly why educated debate and careful thought are never brought up about this and many issues.

You can have your own opinions, and I admire the second mom's ability to stay cool under unbending, fundie fire.

both my boys slept through their circumcisions at 2 days old. They seem happy enough.

On a side not and maybe TMI, my husband seems perfectly happy with this schlog's abilities.

That's all I need to say...

I did not find Daphne to be a bully at all.  She responded very respectfully to Alice.  Daphne stated how she was bothered by a few co-workers who very thoughtlessly decided to circumcise their sons, hence the momversation.  My husband and I are expecting a little boy.  We do not plan on circumcising.  I was relieved how quickly we came to a consensus.  I agree with Daphne that this is a decision that should not be taken lightly and done just because you can or because everyone else is doing it.  And I find it very unfortunate that the child has no say in this.

We had our son circumcised, but I would not do it again if I had it to do over. He's fine and had no problems from the procedure. I just have more information now, and I regret it quite a lot. I think getting accurate information out there is important.

When I was a teenager, an adult relative of mine had to have a circumcision. I remember my mother talking about how he wouldn't have had to go through a painful and complicated procedure if he had been circumcised as a newborn. I also just grew up thinking it was normal, healthy and appropriate. My husband is also circumcised, and I just did not realize that this was a pretty unnecessary procedure. Obviously, I don't like to feel bad about the decision I made for my baby (it was more like NOT making a decision, but just going along with what I thought was almost always done). Still, I think it's really important to talk about all of the reasons not to circumcise so that parents can make informed decisions. If I had seen a video of a circumcision being performed, or read that the supposed health benefits are not significant, I would have made a different choice.

It shouldn't even be a decision. If you don't see how it IS the same as female genital mutilation, then you clearly do not understand the process, it's meaning, it's history, it's total uselessness; and you don't understand what really happens in a female circumcision, because in the countries they are performed in, it is viewed the same as male circumcision is here. That tiny newborns body is not yours, even though you gave birth to him, you can not mutilate his body however you see fit, for no reason other than an appearance you might be used to. Just because something is always done does not make it normal or appropriate.You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

"We modify our bodies all the time to remove primitive adaptations- we remove our tonsils and adenoids, remove our third molars, get braces, extract appendixes, etc."

These comparisons don't make any sense.  Appendixes are removed during a life threatening situation.  You do not remove an appendix before it bursts.  Tonsils and adnoids are only removed now if they are causing illness.  Third molars are removed because most of our mouths are no longer big enough to hold them through adaptations due to not being cavemen meat eaters.  Getting braces is not removing anything.

If you want to compare it to something, compare it to plastic surgery...getting your nose redone, liposuction, etc...  It is completely for aesthetics that most people have their sons circumcised.  Everyone is always saying "Like Father, like Son" or "I don't want him to look different than the other boys in gym class."  

In regards to the post yesterday in the breastfeeding smackdown that the poster doesn't trust men's input on this issue either way. How is it that women get any input on wether or not circucision is the same as FGM? It is exactly the same, unnecessary and barbaric. It kills me the hypocrisy of women who would rip a man a new one if he started minimizing the evil that is FGM, but will condone lopping of a portion of an infants penis.

Stef, are you responding to my comment? If so, please go f*&k yourself (If not, my apologies).

I clearly stated that I feel that I made the wrong choice, and I regret it. Everyone wants what is best for their children. I was taught by doctors and nurses in my family that circumcision was a good choice for preventing future problems.

We had our son circumsized, and I WOULD NOT do it again. He had no problems from the procedure; he healed well. But when he came back and I saw what it looked like -- the blood and the gauze -- I was in tears. Why would anyone do that voluntarily to to their perfect boy?!  

During pregnancy, I was on the fence about it. I read the research, and I wasn't convinced of the benefits, but my husband felt more strongly than I did, and since my husband grew up circumsized, he felt more comfortable having our son look like him. I can't argue that logic (and at the time, I had never seen the gore involved), so we did it. I wouldn't do it again, if we ever have more children.  

One last thing, I can't figure out why you would say Daphne is a bully and way out of line... what gives?

Maggie could not imagine someone taking knief to her newborn? Honey, how do you think the umbilical cord was cut? There are those who claim that to be an act of violence and practice lotus birth.

And, being noncirced can cause problems for some, yes not all, men. My hubby's foreskin would sometimes get very tight and cause him discomfort, and he got circed as an adult. He says it's the best thing he ever did, and that it enhanced sex for him.

"Honey, how do you think the umbilical cord was cut?"

This is honestly the most ridiculous thing I have heard. I am sorry that your husband "had" to get circumcised. Maybe he was never taught how to roll back his foreskin?

Why is it wrong to point out that the umbilical cord was cut, without anesthesia, especially when there are alternatives?

And no Sam, rolling it back does not work for everyone, there are plenty of men who experience problems with their foreskin. Check out the comments on Finslipy for this momversation for more info on the topic.

Because the umbilical cord is intended to be discarded. The foreskin is not a birth defect and the vast majority of men, 99.99 percent of them will not ever have a problem.

My husband and I are still researching and debating the circumcision issue.  Out of curiosity, Sam, would it be easy to show a kid how to deal with a foreskin if you have never seen one?  One of our concerns is that having no experience with foreskins, we would not be very good at taking care of it, or teaching the child to do so himself when the time came.  My SIL did not circumcise her son and he had a bladder infection and a kidney infection before he was 2 years old (I believe she and my bro had no idea what an uncircumcised penis looked like before they had their son).  I'm not being rude, just genuinely curious if it's possible to do a good job with something so intimate that is so unfamiliar.

Most men circumcised or not seem able to lead perfectly normal lives judging from the children they have.  My foreskin was removed in my thirties after my wife and I traded yeast infections back and forth for six years.  It was very painful to go through as an adult.  I'm sure that had it been done when I was born, it would have been painful as well.  However, it would have avoided 6 years of pain and treatment for my wife and myself(the infections stopped after the surgery).  The foreskin is no magical supersensitive skin.  It is just skin.  Both sides need to get a grip and back off.  It is up to parents to decide which way is best for their son.  I don't understand how there can be so many "experts" on men's equipment.

@mchaos It is really easy. In fact, intact boys need no special care. One of the biggest problems intact boys face is parents who (sometimes following Drs poor advice) try to retract the foreskin and clean. It's not the parent's fault mind you but many US docs (especially older ones) aren't practiced. All you have to do is wipe it like a finger in the bath that's it, at some point when he can retract it, this should be done only by the boy and he'll figure out when to start doing it. It's a fun discovery for most boys. And the instructions when he's ready is just retract, rinse replace. It takes longer to say than to do. So don't worry the hygene myth is just that, a myth. NOCIRC has some publications for parents: http://www.nocirc.org/publish/ you can even call them if a question isn't addressed. Please give him a break, don't circumcise him.

@Dan I think you mean most men whose circumcisions weren't botch, of which I know several; one was quite severly. Heck, in the news today their was a story of a boy who bled to death.

I also know I don't consider it just skin. It's the most sensitive and erogenous part for me. I certainly concede that each man is entilted to make that assesment for themselvs but that is each man, not each parent for their son. Boys deserve the same respect for their bodies that girls are given and when there is no demonstratable medical need, circumcision shouldn't be permitted. It just makes sense.

I was circumcised - very badly - but we had sense enough to leave our son intact. It's a lot easier to keep a baby boy clean than a baby girl, but in both cases you just wash them with soap and water. DO NOT forcibly retract his foreskin - nature will take care of it just fine. If he wants to tug on it, let him. The foreskin is not separate from the glans for years.

Would you cut the skin from around your daughter's clitoris?