Babble

 

...just watch a video of the procedure (this was an option in the lamaze class we took).  The baby is strapped down so tightly that he cannot move a muscle, blinded by the lights above him, screaming and sobbing in pure terror the entire time, as a stranger calmly butchers what nature gave him.  I was absolutely horrified, and my husband, who IS circumcised and had felt up to that point that if we had a boy he ought to "look like his father," was so upset he had to leave the room.  After watching that, there was no way in hell we were going to put our newborn baby through that, particularly for any social reason.  In our view, the so-called "medical reasons" are all myths of 50 years ago that have long been debunked (i.e., there is a higher chance of a circumcized newborn getting a post-surgical infection than of an intact, healthy, well-fed, well-hydrated infant or toddler boy getting a urinary tract infection later on).  If you clean him regularly and properly and teach him the same, there will never be a problem.  My son is now two and has never had any issues whatsoever.

If it is for religious reasons, of course that is completely different.  But if your faith (or lack thereof) does not require it, I urge you to ask your OB or pediatrician for some surgical footage.    

I think the choices in the poll could be worded to cause less division in the ranks of parenting. I chose not to circumcise but I don't think my sister ''mutilated'' her boys when she had them cir'd. I think everyone should make an informed choice for their family/religion/culture but I also think it's hard for parents who choose circumcision to not feel judged or attacked when it's referred to in such strong terms.

Funny... this seems to be such a hot button issue! I never realized how taboo it was until I found out that I was having a boy and I planned on circumsizing him! Can I tell you that I even had someone that I met at a bar start an argument with me about it?!?!?!? That lacks total tact in my opinion (not that I expect to find tactful people in bars... but you get my drift). My personal opinion is that you just have to do what is right for you. I read a ton of pro and con info out there and I made my decision and I feel good about it. My son at 8 months isn't complaining... and honestly I doubt that he will when he is older. Most guys I know have been circ'd and I've never had one of them complain to me that they wish that they hadn't been.

This is indeed a tough issue.  As I mentioned in another thread, my wife left the matter entirely up to me, and I made the choice after a lot of research.  I strongly stand by my choice, but I also understand the arguments on the other side.

It seems clear to me that labeling circumcision as genital mutiliation does more to distract attention from the clitorectomies and TRUE genital mutilation that is ongoing in Africa and other less developed countries.

 I stood in the room when both of my sons were circumcised and while they did not love the experience they did not show enormous discomfort or trauma.  They were both asleep 20 minutes later and they had cried more passionately when they underwent their heel samples for genetic testing.

 
While I don't ever want to inflict pain on my kid, and yes I understand that genetic testing has a proven positive outcome while circumcision is not proven better, I do feel that the son should match the father.  Your son will see his father's genitals and if the son's genitals are noticeably different that will cause questions and possibly some concern as to whether he is normal.  You can tell him it is ok all you want, but my son will not have access to public showers for years so finding an adult representation of his genitals will be a long time coming all the while he could have the question of normalcy running through his mind.

 Finally there was a study that uncircumcised male genitals have a higher incidence of AIDS transmission due to the micro-tears that occur during intercourse.  I don't have a link at hand and I don't posit this one study as a definitive work, but that sure makes sense to me.

 

The wording of this poll is outrageous.  What a choice. 

Medical research has recently come out in favor of circumcision for health reasons, specifically in helping to reduce the chances of acquiring sexually transmitted diseases.  No parent wants to see or think of their newborn boy feeling any pain or discomfort, but advanced technologies and high-quality care limit that substantially.  To decide not to circumcise is to put your child at a greater risk for health issues later in life. 

you say most guys have been circ'd and you have never had one of them complain that they wish they hadn't.  WELL HERE I AM.  I was circumcised as in infant and when i learned that some of my penis was removed i was not very happy about it.  Actually approxamentaly 3x5 inches of penile skin is removed that is alot of sexually sensative tissue.  After watching a circumcision here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6584757516627632617&hl=en   watching the baby scream in agony, i cried while watching but made myself watch.  I realize that a nerve block is sometimes used these days but it is not always the case. 

Did you watch you baby have his circumcision, did he scream in agony as the baby did in the video?

 

You know there is a death rate of circumcision, although small why would someone have something done that is unnessary that does kill a small percentage of babies in the USA every year.  the one or two percent could be your baby.

 

After watching this i learned what was cut off and what i was missing here:www.norm.org/lost.html i was disapointed with sex alot of the time i wondered why.  I believe this may explain itThousands of sexual are destroyed including the ridgid band, the Frenilenum the g spot of the penis is either completely removed or seriously dammaged approx 1/2 of my penile skin is gone making my errection thinner & slightly shorter and making errection a painful experience for some.  The natural covering of the head is gone making my head become callused and less sensative (approxamently 10 layers of cells are added to a circumcised penis so less pleasure is felt).  The mucus procuding glands are gone that naturally keep the head of the penis soft supple & sensative these glands also produce a natural antiboitic to protect your penis from infection.  And with the head of the penis exposed all of the time and constantly touched the feeling of touch is an constant thing and touch is not special (try touching someones under arm) thus reducing pleasure even more.   T

 

Most men in the usa dont know any better and dont know how much better sex could be if they had 100% of their penile skin instead of 50% off it.  But they can restore their foreskin as i have with a stretching device.  As you stretch the skin it fools your body to make more skin cells (as a body does as it gets fat)  and you can create a new covering for the head of your penis But you can not  

 

 

the USA is the only country in the entire world that routiniely circumcises infants.  If you are circumcised you are a small percentage compared to the whole world If foreskin caused disease then the entire world would have an eppidemic.

I would say that my sexual pleasure now is a 10!  and before foreskin restoration it was a 4. 

 

I would imagine that if i was uncut that my pleasure would be a 10 and with my restored foreskin a 7 and cut a 3. 

 

Circumcision definently reduces sexual pleasure.

 

And Why are we trying to protect our infants from getting sexually transmitted diseases such as aids.  Is your infant having sex i dont think so.  Any way circumcision does not prevent these diseases condoms do and for your info a less sensative penis is less likely to wear a condom!

I do not trust these studies done in africa any one with a brain would know that the reason these men had a smaller percentage of hiv infection was because their penis was just cut off and it was very soar and they WERE NOT USING IT!  I bet if you checked with these men 1 or 2 years later the hiv infections would be equal to the uncut men.

Why are we circumcising infants?  Our babies certanly are not sexualy active.  Everyone knows circumcision does not prevent hiv CONDOMS DO!  besides it is the reciever that is infected when the semen is ejactulated.  a circumcised penis is less sensative there fore is less likely to use a condom..    I BELIEVE THAT WHEN YOU CIRCUMCISE YOU BABY YOU ARE INCREASEING THE LIKELY HOOD OF NO CONDOM USE THEREFORE INCREASEING THE LIKELYHOOD OF SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES.   Circumcision as adults would make much more sense, 

Infant circumcision is a violation of the babies rights removing healthy part of the body for no good reason.  Its makes as much sense as would be removing the fingernals so we dont have to clean them.  or removing the teath to prevent cavities. 

 An adult could decide if they want to be circumcision.  Anesthesia could be used and also less tissue is removed from an adult.  since the penis is grown up.  An infants penis is very small and is is very easy to remove to much tissue durinig circumcision.

 

This is a cultural thing. In the UK, circumcision is only done for religious reasons by those religious groups. The rest of us (or the vastest vast majority of us) don't do it, haven't had it and would be, probably, surprised to see one. I don't know what the rest of Europe is like. But in the UK, it's fringe stuff.

This surgery is a contra-indicated response to legitimate fears about infections and hygiene. For God's sakes, people, let's use antibiotics and soap instead of scalpels!!

Mother Nature keeps putting those foreskins on male babies; when are we going to understand that this is the ways things SHOULD be?

gapjr:

You know there is a death rate of circumcision

About 250 per year (1 in 5000 circumcisions) in the US. 

mrb:

To decide not to circumcise is to put your child at a greater risk for health issues later in life. 

NO health organization on earth agrees with you.  The authors of the Kenya and Uganda trials don't agree with you.  Their recommendation applied to ADULTS only in places where the AIDS epidemic is like 10 times worse than it is in the US. 

The "success" of the cut African men in the recent trials is this: they got circumcised and still THEY CONTRACTED HIV at a rate SIX TIMES HIGHER than the rate of new infection for African-American men.  Circumcision is no AIDS vaccine. 

It costs the UN just 3 cents to give away a condom. 

 Its a regilious thing whether you circumcise or not.  We are not Jewish or Muslim so we did not circumcise our son.  Its to with religion and culture whether you circumcise babies. Our son is not circumised we are Catholic and its not a prequisite of the religion.

Thanks for posting the link to google video. My wife is pregnant, and we'd already decided not to circumcise if we have a son. Watching this video merely made me even more sure that it's not going to happen...