Awww! How sad! Well, I am SOO glad I posted this topic and even more glad I know of ways to convince my partner it's the best way to go.
Someone Please Fill Me In On Intactivism? - Page 3
- 3,449 Posts. Joined 11/2009
- Location: USA
- Select All Posts By This User
I know it can be tough looking into it all when you already circ'ed one son. I commend your ability to be objective about all of this.
It makes it even more difficult to know that your partner was circ'd and wants the same thing for their son that they had. But I'm sure once he knows the facts he will change his mind.
My dh's first response to not circing was similar to this. It was all he knew and he thought it was weird to do anything different. It was an emotional, irrational response. He admitted that readily and he had heard all the pros of not circing. It just took time for the idea of something "different" to sink in. Sometimes with this argument (that it's just weird b/c it's not what he knows) it can help to bring up other examples of things that we now do differently from our parents that no longer seem weird.
This is true
- 2,019 Posts. Joined 10/2007
- Select All Posts By This User
My DH & I JUST decided this week to not circ our next baby if it's a boy. I just read a; the info, but you know what? All my DH had to hear was how the intact foreskin increase sexual pleasure. That was it- he is now ill at the thought of circumcising. We DID circ our 1st son and I wish we hadn't though.
That's *exactly* what made my DH change his mind
Becky, I talked with my dh yesterday about what changed his mind or, at the very least, allowed him to be okay with not circing before the baby was born. He said that he knew how strongly I felt about it and was sort of resigned to the fact that my opinion would win out in the end. Haha! But beyond that he said he's logical and he recognized that there was no logical reason to do it. His reasoning was not logical and he could recognize that. It was just the emotion that was there. So he was fine with the reasoning, just not 100% on board emotionally prior to the birth. AFTER the birth he was very happy with his decision. He couldn't see any way that he could allow that to be done to his perfect angel of a baby.
So there are two ideas... appeal to the logic and say if you can recognize there is no logical reason, no medical reason to do it at birth then let's wait until after the birth and see how you feel then. I know he's already been through one so this may not be as strong a factor for him as it was for my dh, but at least he might agree to not do it right away and then there is time to get used to seeing his son uncirced and just letting it go... not making the appointment.
How did I know that I would read he was overpowered by you? lol You sound like a very strong woman, and I am glad that there are women like you on here to kind of guide people like me to choices that feel right for them. Also, if I DO end up having a boy, this will be my partner's first boy. My ex and I had a son together. Anywho, that's neither here nor there. The part I'm concerned with is getting DP on MY side of the fence.(or at least ON the fence) lol
Thanks Becky! Well since you dp hasn't been through it before then it's quite possible that the whole "perfect angel baby" angle might work on him too!
I sure hope so! lol
It's against the site rules (TOS) to promote or argue over circumcision as there is no medical benefit and much evidence of long-term harm. It may not be obvious at the time (healing fine) but many men have permanent psychological damage from it. I know one personally who talks about how he's never forgiven his parents since he discovered what they did to him. He likens it to assault and feels violated.
The way I look at it is: he can choose later to have a circumcision if he likes that or needs it (just like he can choose to have his penis tattooed, pierced or split, at his personal preference or belief--it's a modification like any of those), but he may not be able to afford restoration. Also, it's not my body--I have no right to alter my child sexually without their consent. I don't care what the law says, it's against my beliefs. It boils down to: his body, his choice. It's not a birth defect and it's been a procedure looking for something that it's curing for so long that I don't believe it 'cures' anything (especially considering that all research that shows it does has been disproven, repeatedly).
The only two websites you need about intactivism if you aren't religious:
If you are Jewish:
Edited by xakana - 6/12/11 at 12:21pm
On the partner thing: I assured my husband that it had nothing to do with his penis or me thinking there was anything wrong with it. I like his penis just fine, lol, obviously! But that it was about our imaginary son's rights (we were still waiting on gender when we had the talk) and eventually, he said it was up to me because I felt so much more passionately about it and was willing to do all the research, lol.
And finally (since I just caught up on the thread, sorry!) for anyone having reluctant partners, an organization actually put together an information packet to help parents choose to reject circumcision (it's supposed to be good info): http://www.savingpenises.org/our-information-packs.html
I just asked my husband about that and he said that outside of a public swimming pool, he's never seen another man's penis in a locker room or shower. Men who look in bathrooms are likely to get hit. If they comment? Yeah, they'll get in a ton of trouble. So, no. Men don't have some secret penis showing. Boys used to do that in novels anyway (and preschoolers do--but one preschool penis pretty much looks like another--they aren't going to be the right age to mock each other for it); I don't know of any guys who ever actually did that (I've asked a few, but I decided to double check since DH is sitting right there).
I looked carefully over the TOS and nowhere does it say talking about circumcision is violation of TOS. This isn't a BASHING on circ, it's educational.
This is from the forum guidelines for The Case Against Circumcision: "Mothering questions routine medical circumcision and advocates for informed consent. TCAC hosts discussion of the reasons to avoid circumcision, the history of the procedure, medical issues and studies, complications, the needs and rights of the child, care of the intact child's penis and other educational topics. We are not interested in hosting discussion on merits of routine infant medical circumcision."
So if you are pro-circ, you really can't come here and argue that it's beneficial, or looks better, or whatever gets you particularly thrilled about it. And I like it that way, so I'm glad it hasn't changed.
Mmmm, I don't know about that. It says Mothering as an entity is against RIC. I don't think that simplfying the UA means they are allowing pro-circumcision talk around the other forums. But that's just my opinion, maybe I should check with a mod. Honestly I wouldn't be able to come here anymore if they were OK with it. And I just don't see Peggy O'Mara going that direction... but I've sure been wrong before.
From the TOS that applies to the entire site and everyone on it:
"We are not interested, however, in hosting discussions that advocate crying it out, harsh sleep training, physical punishment, formula feeding, elective cesarean section, routine infant medical circumcision, or mandatory vaccinations as a parenting philosophy."
So, underline and bold is mine, but that's copy/pasted. So, as long as no one's going "Hooray for surgically altering baby penises!" I think this discussion is fine ;)