Does anyone else feel sad for their circ'd partner or husband? - Page 3

[aHikaru]

To be honest I wish my hubby wasn't circumsized either, primarily for cosmetic reasons, which ever doctor did it, didn't do a nice job, so it doesn't look as nice. I know it's a different perspective, but I think moms should leave it up to their sons to decide what they want because thats something they can't get back.

[WildKingdom]

Originally Posted by MCatLvrMom2A&X 

There was a study done that showed without doubt circ and ED are very related it has to do with the nerve and tissue damage that happens with circ. Does anyone have that link? I used to have it but my laptop died

Actually, the research is mixed, with some studies showing an increase in Ed, some showing a decrease in Ed, and the vast majority showing no difference at all. Regardless, Ed is a bloodflow problem, and the main cause in the USA is peripheral vascular disease, from diabetes and hypertension.

Also my response was to the PP who stated that the reason you don't see ads for ED drugs in Europe was because of their lower rate of circ. This is false, no two ways about it. You won't see ads for ANY prescription drug in europe. Sorry for typos, on my phone.

[tammylsmith]

Well, I can't say about the E.D. connection, but there are men who are restoring primarily to regain sensation that stared to diminish as they got older. Some of the men who contributed to this board regularly have said as much... so, even if it is not E.D. specifically, there are issues with loss of sensation over time that can possibly lead to problems.

[hakunangovi]

Originally Posted by tammylsmith 

Well, I can't say about the E.D. connection, but there are men who are restoring primarily to regain sensation that stared to diminish as they got older. Some of the men who contributed to this board regularly have said as much... so, even if it is not E.D. specifically, there are issues with loss of sensation over time that can possibly lead to problems.

This is true.  I was starting to suffer from "delayed ejaculation" - Some days were good - others, it just did not happen. I mentioned this to my doctor, a wonderful English lady.  Her reply was "Well, it's the circumcision thing".

[terry4me]

In response to the circumcsion question, I didn't have my son done for many reasons: his father wasn't, I'd been told many people wern't doing it any more, but mostly I didn't want to hurt him. I found out that most people (especially men!) feel very strongly that it should be done. Most women seem to feel that uncirc'd is unappealling.And since I now work in a hospital I have seen it done many times and it really isn't bad for them. Some don't even react at all.It's true that the main thing they cry about is being restrained,but it only takes a minuet.Eventually, when he was three, my son developed adhesions and had to be done.Now that was awful! It was very painfull for him and I still feel bad(twenty years later). I had my next son done for sure and I highly reccomend it be done right after birth when it is simple, quick and easy.

[tammylsmith]

That is why I am forever grateful to this board and the wonderful, knowledgeable mamas and papas who frequent it . I learned so much here, and my son is the benefactor. There was probably so much bad advice 20 years ago... your poor sons I get very frustrated with medical professionals who don't know how simple foreskin care is... how you pretty much just don't ever retract and leave it alone. Often, and I'm sure this was even more the case back then... doctors just see problems that aren't there, or actually cause the problem by mistakenly advising mamas to retract for cleaning. I'm so sorry you had to circumcise your boys because of that. I'll bet that must have been so hard to watch your older one suffer like that, when you love him so much!

Sadly, after birth, cutting off the foreskin is neither quick nor easy-- with nothing but a lolli pop for the pain, poor babe.. but just as bad as it was for the older child. The infant just doesn't yet have the words to express it. Thankfully, with this being "the case against circumcision" and all... there are many mamas here who know the truth and are ready to do away with myths like that one that linger in society. I'm so thankful that they showed me the truth behind the mounds of cultural baggage, and I now hope to pass that on to other mamas so that they can hold a candle of truth in the darkness of genital cutting in America. I hope you can stay and learn from the wisdom accumulated here. It is priceless.

[pennnyforum]

I felt sad at our first intimacy when i discovered my DH was circumcised. I remember trying to push the remains of his foreskin over the rim and it just wouldn't go. How could his mother choose to have him live the rest of his life without any protection for the delicate head? It seemed so unfair. However, to my surprise, his circumcision has had no negative effects on our sex life, which is some consolation.

He on the other hand says he wouldn't have it any other way. His father and all his brothers are cut. It's not religious but just a family thing. I tried to change this because I came from an 'all males intact' family but I lost the battle for my first boy and caved in to pressure from MIL and DH. Eventually I won and kept my second intact for his first years only to have to have him circumcised aged six for medical reasons.

If I ever have another boy, I'm not sure what I would do.

[jenP]

Welcome, Pennyforum, and stick around! There is so much to learn here, to debunk the myths that American doctors are still promulgating. For instance, a true medical need for circumcision is vanishingly rare, and you'll learn about all the inaccurate reasons American doctors give for why a baby or young child "must" be circumcised; i.e. "adhesions" or "tight foreskin" (the phony phimosis diagnosis.) Those with an understanding of normal male anatomy know that a tight, adhered foreskin is developmentally natural. It should never be pushed back at all for "cleaning" or any other reason; the foreskin is supposed to be tightly adhered to the glans (penis head) and it will separate in its own time, which could be during childhood or could be during puberty. I've even heard of doctors recommending circumcision for a baby that simply had diaper rash on his foreskin! (Without the foreskin, he would have had diaper rash on the glans, so what would be the point of cutting off the foreskin?)

It is also a myth that circumcision is "easier" on a baby. It is painful at any age, and even if the procedure could be done with absolutely no pain during surgery or during recovery, it would still be wrong because it robs the child of his right to a whole body and to a functioning, useful part of his sexual anatomy, filled with specialized nerve endings and structures. In babies, the synechia (fibers adhering the foreskin to the glans, as it is supposed to be in babies) must first be separated by the doctor shoving a blunt instrument in through the opening of the foreskin and ripping it apart. This is analogous to tearing your fingernail from the nail bed. In adults, whose foreskin has separated from the glans and is retractable, this step is not needed and so a circumcision on an adult is that much less painful and complicated. Add to that the fact that adult men can have proper pain management during the procedure and during recovery, and their wound doesn't have to sit in a diaper with urine and feces, and you see that the idea that it is "easier" and "less painful" for babies is preposterous.

[jenP]

Originally Posted by terry4me 

In response to the circumcsion question, I didn't have my son done for many reasons: his father wasn't, I'd been told many people wern't doing it any more, but mostly I didn't want to hurt him. I found out that most people (especially men!) feel very strongly that it should be done. Most women seem to feel that uncirc'd is unappealling.And since I now work in a hospital I have seen it done many times and it really isn't bad for them. Some don't even react at all.It's true that the main thing they cry about is being restrained,but it only takes a minuet.Eventually, when he was three, my son developed adhesions and had to be done.Now that was awful! It was very painfull for him and I still feel bad(twenty years later). I had my next son done for sure and I highly reccomend it be done right after birth when it is simple, quick and easy.

"Developed adhesions"? Sadly, your doctor was misinformed. Babies don't "develop" adhesions, they are born that way - with the foreskin completely adhered to the glans penis, exactly as it should be. An infant's foreskin should not be retractable, nor should it be pushed back, even a little bit, for cleaning or for examination - this causes damage that can lead to problems and then a circumcision, all because of lack of knowledge about the normal male anatomy. I see that this happened twenty years ago. Back then there was far less information available to parents. These days we are lucky to have information available, and it is possible to find more knowledgeable doctors. Unfortunately, there are still many many ignorant American doctors who will tell you that your son "must" be circumcised because he has a "tight" foreskin (remember, it is supposed to be tight!) or who will spout the nonsense that it hurts less on an infant and should be done then. (Infants have fully developed nervous systems.) So you had two sons suffer because of bad medical advice and treatment. I hope you will stick around the forum and learn more about these myths that pervade our culture, what damage is done, what is lost, and why so many men are adamant that their sons be circumcised.

As for babies crying due to being restrained rather than due to being cut with a sharp blade....ask yourself if there is any other part of their body where they would not mind having a sharp blade make an incision or an amputation. Again, babies are born with fully-functioning nervous systems. Here is a comment I wrote about that on another thread.  http://www.mothering.com/community/forum/thread/1304224/just-a-question/20#post_16372484 Watch the movie and see how the baby ONLY cries when his penis is clamped and cut, NOT when he is held on his back, stripped, and swabbed. Logically, it makes no sense to think that a baby can feel cold and sense his position (and thus cries because he is cold or held down on his back) but somehow magically can't feel part of his body being clamped, crushed, and cut with a blade. If you were holding your baby happy and snug in your arms, say he was sleeping or nursing even, do you think he wouldn't notice or mind if someone came over and took a snip out of his earlobe with a sharp pair of scissors? The foreskin has more nerve endings than the earlobe.
 

[QueenOfTheMeadow]

Just a reminder of the TCAC guidelines:

We are not interested in hosting discussion on merits of routine infant medical circumcision

Ihave allowed some posts to remain in order to allow members to gently educate people who are pro-circumcision on the short term and long term harm circumcision causes. But from here on out, posts that support routine infant circumcision will be removed. Thanks!