Mainstream Article

[~Em~]

I thought this was fairly well written for a mainstream article - it gives both sides, but it also cites sources and, ultimately, is definitely not pro-circumcision.

Parents who are still deciding (there are a lot out there) are often turned off immediately by articles that are too negative, so I thought this article was good about not telling parents what they should think and instead showing them the facts. "Circ'ing is barbaric" is not helpful - IMO reading how it is done is more useful, you know?

I'm sure you are also tired of reading articles in mainstream media about circing being perfectly fine but not giving nearly enough information for anyone to really make an informed decision.

I have not read up on any of this in a long time, so some of the information was new to me. Anyway, I thought I'd just throw it out and let you all have a read - criticism can be directed to the comment section if you have some (and I know you will! ).

http://www.everparent.com/articles/2...-are-you-on/1/

I haven't been back here for a while, but I'm now pregnant with a girl, so I figured now's a good enough time to start posting again.

[Dev]

I agree... this is a pretty good article for the mainstream, circ. happy USA. I left a good comment. What's missing is mention of the violation of medical ethics behind performing amputative surgury on healthy, normal, non-diseased tissue on non-consenting minors.
MY BOTTOM LINE: HIS PENIS, ONLY HIS CHOICE.
Men (and women) who are allowed as children to keep their whole, intact, normal genitalia, DON’T choose to amputate parts as adults!
Devin

[serendipity22]

The conclusion is very confused:

Bottom line, unless circumcision either becomes mandatory or outlawed, it is a personal decision for every parent

'Personal' is confused with 'parental'.

which is clearly inconsistent with:

Anti-circumcision parents, groups, and activists feel parents do not have the right to permanently alter their sons, and the decision should be left for their sons to make.

Bottom line, the article concludes its up to the parents, which is one of the
strongest and most insidious pro-circ points of view. Any reason (or none) will do, even 'instincts'.

[brant31]

Meh. It struck me as a generally pro-circ author or group of authors trying their darnedest to write a "balanced" article through gritted teeth. The article didn't give a sense of just how out of step the US is with other developed countries on this issue (just saying it's "much lower" elsewhere) and failing to even hint that this may be an economic issue in the US much more than a mummy & daddy conundrum.

I get easily bored with these "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" comparisons when the real engine for circumcision is how our healthcare is delivered. Kill the incentives and slay the beast. It's amazing how quickly common sense returns when circumcision has to meet surgical standards and pay its own way. It also avoids criticizing parents one way or the other.

Thank you for finding this for us, and I'll see about leaving a comment there.

[Fellow Traveler]

A quick read and I didn't think it was awful. As Brant pointed out they could have added better context, like we're the only ones that do this, but they did describe not being circumcised as "intact" which I think was great. When you change the language you start to change the minds, you know. Thanks OP for pointing this article out.

[Greg B]

This is a pretty good article, one of the better ones form my perspective. Certainly one of the few to really point out the value of foreskin and keep that issue as balanced as the other ones.

They could have done more with the human rights angle and the comsmetic issue.

However, the "mandatory vs outlawed" summation seems odd and confusing. A poor ending that will only lead to confusion.

Thanks for the heads up.

[~Em~]

No problem. It's my understanding that this is a new site - I noticed they had some articles on green living and nutrition, etc., but I haven't had a chance to read them yet. If they are decent, I always try to leave comments to encourage those kind of articles, kwim?

[PlainandTall]

Thanks for sharing that article Em!

I think the article was dramatically different than most in two ways.

The title "Right or Wrong" is a very different approach than the usual "Yes or No" or "Worth it or not" Allowing the questing to be seen in a moral or ethical light is typically not a pro-circumcision approach. For example- most articles cite avoiding pain as the main reason parents chose to skip circumcision... (as if we would do it in a heartbeat if it just didn't hurt!)

The article also spent a fair number of words explaining (or trying to) the sexual function - something most articles don't touch with a ten foot pole. Most articles frame the question : If you could get the benefits while avoiding the risks you would have win-win.... but when the troubling facts about sexual function and value enter the picture- even if you win the surgical lottery- you still stand to lose something.

The article concludes: " As parents, the only thing we can do is educate ourselves, trust our instincts, and hope the medical community will offer solid reasoning before ever suggesting an alteration to the human body."

There may be more than one way to read that, but I see the author saying, "They better not be altering bodies without solid reasoning. " the word HOPE and WILL OFFER imply that this is something that may come in the future but has NOT happened yet.

[EPLisa]

Thank you for the feedback, everyone. Em, thank you for sharing the article!

Originally Posted by brant31

Meh. It struck me as a generally pro-circ author or group of authors trying their darnedest to write a "balanced" article through gritted teeth.

I am the author of the article, and I am definitely not pro-circ. I am the mother of two little boys (ages 7 and 5) who were not circumcised. When I was pregnant with my oldest son, I searched the internet and asked everyone I could about the pros and cons of circumcision. I had a lot of strong opinions and misinformation to wade through, but my husband and I ultimately made a decision that I feel was the only right one for my children. If my boys decide they would like their foreskins removed, it will be their decision, and their decision only.

[Fellow Traveler]

Originally Posted by EPLisa

Thank you for the feedback, everyone. Em, thank you for sharing the article!



I am the author of the article, and I am definitely not pro-circ. I am the mother of two little boys (ages 7 and 5) who were not circumcised. When I was pregnant with my oldest son, I searched the internet and asked everyone I could about the pros and cons of circumcision. I had a lot of strong opinions and misinformation to wade through, but my husband and I ultimately made a decision that I feel was the only right one for my children. If my boys decide they would like their foreskins removed, it will be their decision, and their decision only.

You're welcome Lisa, thanks for coming back and letting us know. I think where I (and most others here) differ from your position is that we don't believe it's up to the parent at all. Without clear unambiguous medical need, only the individual himself should make this type of choice.

But that aside, I did by and large find it to be a reasonable article.