or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Understanding Circumcision › Maybe an urban legend?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Maybe an urban legend? - Page 2

post #21 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzer Beater View Post



I don't think anyone here is bashing an adult who makes a painful decision about his own health. Things are rarely bound to go wrong and it sounds like your brother was unfortunate and made a choice for himself.

 


I totally agree with yor assement, except for the tone here is always...NEVER will anything go wrong and everyone who got circed got duped. I am not too involved in my brother's penis history:), but I know it was a hard decision for him and from what I understand there were lots of adhesions from him trying to retract as an ADULT and it just not working. I also know that it was VERY painful surgery and hard to recover from. So, in my family it was not an urban myth, but it has not changed my general opinion about circ because well..it is RARE!
 

 

post #22 of 43

I know a good many intact men and none that have experienced any problems requiring surgery. I haven't even heard any "friends of friends" horror stories.

 

My intact little brother got a penis infection when he was 13. He took antibiotics for it and it cleared up. I have since not heard of any subsequent problems--imagine if some doctor had insisted he needed to be circumcised to correct it!

 

I think older people have heard this story more often because doctors suggested circumcision when it wasn't needed, like for infection or inability to retract?

 

It wasn't just foreskins they did this to. For instance, doctors in past generations were more likely than they are now to recommend removing tonsils at the first sign of throat infection.

post #23 of 43


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleZB View Post

I know a good many intact men and none that have experienced any problems requiring surgery. I haven't even heard any "friends of friends" horror stories.

 

My intact little brother got a penis infection when he was 13. He took antibiotics for it and it cleared up. I have since not heard of any subsequent problems--imagine if some doctor had insisted he needed to be circumcised to correct it!

 

I think older people have heard this story more often because doctors suggested circumcision when it wasn't needed, like for infection or inability to retract?

 

It wasn't just foreskins they did this to. For instance, doctors in past generations were more likely than they are now to recommend removing tonsils at the first sign of throat infection.


Exactly. That's a surgery (tonsillectomy) that was once routine that is now, thankfully, no longer so. I had mine out when I was a preschooler. Apparently, the doctor told my mother it was absolutely necessary to prevent repeated infections. Yet, my two kids have never had any problems with their intact tonsils. ;)

 

post #24 of 43

I also had my tonsils out, for similar reasons. I'm still fairly prone to sore throats, etc., so I don't think it accomplished anything!

post #25 of 43

I don't think it's an urban legend persay, I think there is a lot of bad info out there and doctors who are happy to jump to circ when there are other options.

 

FWIW my (intact) DH's grandfather was circumcised at 90. My guess is there was an infection caused by improper care once he was unable to care for himself and the doctor didn't bother looking for other treatments.

post #26 of 43

I think that between the 40's and 60's dr.s pushed circs. Many men who had no problems what so ever were convinced that it had to be done. My FIL was one of those. The Dr told him that it would cause problems with his sex life, It wasn't at the time but it would at some future date. So he got it done at 28 to prevent this awful future sex issue That would surly come up.

post #27 of 43

I don't know of anyone in real life who "had to be" circumcised later in life or who chose to be circumcised, I only know of men who were circed as infants.

 

In 1940 in England, everyone knew someone who knew someone who buried a drowned German soldier. (It was rumoured there was a failed invasion attempt). Only problem was there were not any.

 
post #28 of 43

I have a few friends in the military that were not circ'd they didn't want to be either.  The military did kind of push having it done but they wouldn't do it.  Just like they wanted to pull out all my wisdom teeth but I kept two because of the way my jaw sits they're fine where they are at and should never cause me any problems.  These same men made sure their boys were not circ'd either.  They just didn't see the point in it and honestly I think if more fathers put their foot down it would help the cause.  We have a family friend who wasn't circ'd but his wife was doing all she could to change his mind.  Kind of ruined our friendship with her when we got thrown in the mix and asked our opinion...  The boy is still intact and momma is still pissed about it.  When she was pregnant with their daughter he brought home literature about FGM and told her he thought it was a good idea... I think he was just trying to piss her off more but hopefully it worked to at least start changing her mind.

post #29 of 43

 

 

Quote:
Everybody seems to know someone who had a friend, uncle, whoever that had to be circ'ed as an adult due to infection.

 

I've heard this from friends or acquaintances before, too, but it was always this guy's brother's roommate's cousin kind of thing. My mom worked at a nursing home in the 70's and 80's. About 50/50 intact/circed. She didn't see any more problems in the intact over the circumcised. And as far as cleaning, her comments echo bandgeek's; all penises at that age have that sagginess and wrinkles and the men both intact and circed needed extra attention getting clean. 

 

On another note, my boyfriend in college was intact and did get an awful yeast infection while I was with him. Did cause him some inflammation and tightness for awhile. Again this was circ happy Midwest in the early 90's and dr. never suggested circumcision to him, nor would he have ever accepted. Just gave him some monistat type stuff and steroid cream.

post #30 of 43

I think that these urban myths are so prevalent in North America because they are partly true.  Especialy in the past, but even today, there are many doctors and urologists out there who will whack off a foreskin for any hint of a problem, be it real or percieved.  What really annoys me is that they are so uneducated/dismissive of less invasive procedures that preserve the foreskin.  In Edward Wallerstein's book "Circumcision - An American Health Fallacy" I think it is called, he states that in Finland, a non circumcising culture, only one in 16,000 men will die without his foreskin.  That is pretty good odds!!  As some PPs stated, many of our doctors do not know much about intact genitalia and have this hang up about forced retraction and cleaning, or insist that a boy must be circumcised if he is not retractable by xx age, or he must be circumcised to treat an infection.  What are antibiotics for?  Who can trust them?

post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by hakunangovi View Post

Especialy in the past, but even today, there are many doctors and urologists out there who will whack off a foreskin for any hint of a problem, be it real or percieved.  What really annoys me is that they are so uneducated/dismissive of less invasive procedures that preserve the foreskin.  


don't you think that this is b/c the doctors get paid so much to do circumcisions? i'm personally of the belief that this is pretty much what it's ALL ABOUT. this is exactly why the doctors hype it up and exaggerate any perceived "health" or "cleanliness" issues, while downplaying the (very real) risk of severe hospital born infection, medical errors and diminished sexual capacity FOR LIFE. 

 

and people buy it b/c in our culture at least, doctors are treated as "Gods" who know it all. 

 

i personally think it's about time (long past time) to pull back the curtain so to speak, to reveal the truth, to stop these misguided doctors in their tracks, who have no appreciation for healthy intact bodies and IGNORE a helpless baby's intense and shocking pain... just to make $300 off a non-medical, unnecessary, cosmetic surgery done without anaestesia.

 

i applaud the presence of this forum, and the work of national organizations bringing this issue to light and revealing the truth.

post #32 of 43

I agree! I know a 3 y/o who had 2 UTI's his whole life and his ped said he HAD to be circ'ed! IDK if the mother did it or not...I sure hope not. She wasn't an intactivist or anything, just left him like his father...

post #33 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by tropicana View Post


don't you think that this is b/c the doctors get paid so much to do circumcisions? i'm personally of the belief that this is pretty much what it's ALL ABOUT. this is exactly why the doctors hype it up and exaggerate any perceived "health" or "cleanliness" issues, while downplaying the (very real) risk of severe hospital born infection, medical errors and diminished sexual capacity FOR LIFE. 

 

and people buy it b/c in our culture at least, doctors are treated as "Gods" who know it all. 

 

i personally think it's about time (long past time) to pull back the curtain so to speak, to reveal the truth, to stop these misguided doctors in their tracks, who have no appreciation for healthy intact bodies and IGNORE a helpless baby's intense and shocking pain... just to make $300 off a non-medical, unnecessary, cosmetic surgery done without anaestesia.

 

i applaud the presence of this forum, and the work of national organizations bringing this issue to light and revealing the truth.



Tropicana,  Absolutely, I think you are correct. I am sure the $$$ are a huge incentive.  There are other factors at play too though.  I think many have not bothered to upgrade their knowlege since they left medical scool, and sadly have no appreciation of the form, function or value of a foreskin.  Then there is the ego issue.  Once a doctor has performed one circumcision, he feels compelled to continue to save face from admitting that he made a mistake the first time.  As we are all well aware, the medical community as a whole is loath to admit errors, and mistakes are swept under the rug if at all possible.

 

I ,  too, applaud all the pro genital integrity organisations and individuals out there, who are trying to get the truth out to a largely ignorant public who do not see the deception being shoved at them by their doctors.  We will win in the end!!

 

post #34 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imakcerka View Post

  We have a family friend who wasn't circ'd but his wife was doing all she could to change his mind.  Kind of ruined our friendship with her when we got thrown in the mix and asked our opinion...  The boy is still intact and momma is still pissed about it.  When she was pregnant with their daughter he brought home literature about FGM and told her he thought it was a good idea... I think he was just trying to piss her off more but hopefully it worked to at least start changing her mind.


Good for the Dad.  This is a bit unusual for the Momma to want to circumcise (as opposed to the Dad) - What was her reason?  I love the bit about their daughter.  Most people are horrified at the thought of FGM, so I hope it made her realise that Circumcision is not much different.
 

 

post #35 of 43

I haven't read the thread yet, but I haven't heard of anyone needing this in DH's family (though I'm not sure about their status). I'm from Europe and I have never heard of any adult man in my family in need of circumcision. Most still be an American thing. And both my grandfathers were in nursing homes for their last year (s). Never once got a UTI. Maybe American nursing home personnel just has no idea how to properly clean an intact man?

 

@ Haku: It is not unusual at all for moms to want that. I have heard from so many, many mainstream mothers that they a) want the son to look like daddy or b) they think foreskins are ugly and would never allow their sons to have an ugly penis/have a future girlfriend reject him for it. Seriously, I have even heard women saying they would never sleep with an intact guy. It's quite shocking. I must say DS;s foreskin has hence become a method of bad girlfriend prevention ;) - who would want a partner who would force you to alter your genitals?!


Edited by nia82 - 12/11/11 at 1:28pm
post #36 of 43

Most physicians I've met genuinely believe in circumcision, that it has therapeutic value.  You can't make generalizations about their motivations, because just like everyone else, each person's reasoning is different.  I hate to see this speculation, because the way this sort of thing works online is that in a few months, it will be repeated as fact that this is why physicians do it, as opposed to speculation.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tropicana View Post


don't you think that this is b/c the doctors get paid so much to do circumcisions? i'm personally of the belief that this is pretty much what it's ALL ABOUT. this is exactly why the doctors hype it up and exaggerate any perceived "health" or "cleanliness" issues, while downplaying the (very real) risk of severe hospital born infection, medical errors and diminished sexual capacity FOR LIFE. 

 

and people buy it b/c in our culture at least, doctors are treated as "Gods" who know it all. 

 

i personally think it's about time (long past time) to pull back the curtain so to speak, to reveal the truth, to stop these misguided doctors in their tracks, who have no appreciation for healthy intact bodies and IGNORE a helpless baby's intense and shocking pain... just to make $300 off a non-medical, unnecessary, cosmetic surgery done without anaestesia.

 

i applaud the presence of this forum, and the work of national organizations bringing this issue to light and revealing the truth.



 

post #37 of 43

It depends on the type of FGC versus MGC we're talking about.  Some type 1 and 2 FGC are much different than RIC.  Penile subincision is more drastic than RIC.  These broad brush strokes don't really work in real life.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hakunangovi View Post


Good for the Dad.  This is a bit unusual for the Momma to want to circumcise (as opposed to the Dad) - What was her reason?  I love the bit about their daughter.  Most people are horrified at the thought of FGM, so I hope it made her realise that Circumcision is not much different.
 

 



 

post #38 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by LonelyPageTurnr View Post

It depends on the type of FGC versus MGC we're talking about.  Some type 1 and 2 FGC are much different than RIC.  Penile subincision is more drastic than RIC.  These broad brush strokes don't really work in real life.


They really do, because most people are horrified by any kind of surgical alteration to a female's genitals, but those same people don't even blink at RIC. If people were solely horrified by the most severe forms of FGM, then your point would be valid. But, they're not. Ask most people how they'd feel about a doctor nicking a baby girl's clitoral hood...and compare that to their reactions to routine circ of newborn boys. The reactions are completely inconsistent.

 

post #39 of 43

But they're not across the board horrified with all FGC.  They think that excision and infibulation is the most common type.  I remember that blog with the little girl getting circumcised, and there was so little tissue removed you could hardly see it.  I think that the people who think that's mutilation and RIC is fine are crazy, personally.  That doesn't mean that we can MAKE UP comparisons that aren't valid.  Period.  It's a lie, no matter how 'most' people feel about anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post


They really do, because most people are horrified by any kind of surgical alteration to a female's genitals, but those same people don't even blink at RIC. If people were solely horrified by the most severe forms of FGM, then your point would be valid. But, they're not. Ask most people how they'd feel about a doctor nicking a baby girl's clitoral hood...and compare that to their reactions to routine circ of newborn boys. The reactions are completely inconsistent.

 



 

post #40 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by LonelyPageTurnr View Post

But they're not across the board horrified with all FGC.  They think that excision and infibulation is the most common type.  I remember that blog with the little girl getting circumcised, and there was so little tissue removed you could hardly see it.  I think that the people who think that's mutilation and RIC is fine are crazy, personally.  That doesn't mean that we can MAKE UP comparisons that aren't valid.  Period.  It's a lie, no matter how 'most' people feel about anything.



 



Okay. You know different people than I do. I've never met anybody who isn't horrified by the idea of any kind of FGM, no matter how slight it is.

 

But, the post you were originally answering said, "Most people are horrified at the thought of FGM, so I hope it made her realise that Circumcision is not much different.". That's what was being addressed - people's horror at FGM. So, what level of FGM is required to inspire horror/disgust is absolutely relevant to that quote.

 

Nobody's making up comparisons. Yes - the most severe forms of FGM are more severe than RIC...but that's like saying it's an "invalid" comparison if someone is horrified at chopping off a finger, and compares it to chopping off a hand. The loss of the hand is obviously more severe and drastic - but it doesn't make the loss of the finger any less of an assault or mutilation. This weird mental divide we have between removing infant boy's foreskins to lessen sexual pleasure (and that is where it came from, in the non-Jewish American culture) and cutting up female genitals to lessen their sexual pleasure is really weird.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Understanding Circumcision
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Understanding Circumcision › Maybe an urban legend?