Anyone wish their husband/partner were intact? - Page 3

[jazminflower]

yup!

side note: we didn't find out the sex of dd until she was born. we had discussed not circumsizing if it was a boy...then after dh went with dd to the nursery while they stabalized me, he was looking at the informational poster at the circumcision area. later that morning, he said to me...i'm glad we had a girl and if she were male or we ever have a boy we will not be doing THAT!!!

[Frankly Speaking]

Originally Posted by Gendenwitha

There was a study in the news saying the opposite around the end of 96 beginning of 97--about the same time my first son was born. I just remember at the time that was in the news and when I said that, most of the people I was talking to had seen that study in their newspaper. Can't tell you who did it or anything more than that, sorry. (Although it certainly seems illogical that someone with more sensitivity is going to lose function sooner.)

You only got part of the study. There was the one you are talking about that was done by Edward O. Laumann of the University of Chicago. The project was constructed to learn the different sexual proclivities of intact and circumcised men and to test out some research that was originally done in 1916 that showed that circumcised men participated in alternative sexual practices more than intact men including a masturbation rate that is 40% higher for circumcised men. Something that showed up in the project was that intact men became impotent an average of several months before circumcised men. This was information that was not designed into the project. This made absolutely no sense to Dr. Laumann and he did another research project two years later that addressed this issue specifically and accounted for as many confounders as possible. This more specific project showed that circumcised men became impotent on an average, years before their intact peers. This is what would be expected.

Of course, here in the States, the first project got a lot of press and the later, more accurate project got almost none at all. Even the AMA site shows the first project but does not have the second. It's almost like they are intentionally trying to hide something! I wonder why that would be?






Frank

[Gendenwitha]

Originally Posted by Frankly Speaking

You only got part of the study. There was the one you are talking about that was done by Edward O. Laumann of the University of Chicago. ...done in 1916

I don't think so. Although I certainly buy the AMA having alterior motives, this was a recent study that was a sound-bite around the AP wire at the time, and since it was a bit "weird" not to circumcise, I had several people say to me, "Well, did you hear about that study that just came out..." (sort of emphasising that my sons would have less longevitity to their sex life) and that was my humorous response to it--'well, at least I benefit from having a circed husband' and refocusing them on my sons having a better sex life.

[Frankly Speaking]

I think you misunderstand. There was a study done in 1916 that showed these things. Laumann did a similar study in 1997 using modern methods and means to see if there was any truth to the 1916 studies and obtained almost identical results. Laumann's 1997 study was not designed to measure when men became impotent but those results showed up after distilling the information. The 1916 study was not looking for information on impotence and did not find it. Laumann's 1997 study wasn't looking for it either but did find it.

Laumann (in 1997) did not understand why his research project showed this information and constructed a new research project that would measure impotence and other related sexual problems and did that project and reported it in 1999. That project considered confounders such as smoking, vascular disease and diabetes to eliminate factors that could also cause impotence and found that circumcised men have a shorter sex life than genitally intact men.

You were victim to the first project and the popular media's bias toward circumcision. Every one has been a victim of the press and the medical profession because they reported the erroneous information and never reported the corrected information and the medical profession even seems to be hiding the information. That is to be expected. One medical writer has warned that this could be the world's largest class action lawsuit with literally humdreds of millions of potential class members and certainly Phizer Pharmaceuticals (Viagra) and other companies with ED drugs on the market making billions of $$$$ don't want that information to get out.

I am quite sure the research I was talking about is the same one you are talking about since there hasn't been any other similar research projects I am aware of during that decade and it is not likely the media would be reporting on research from previous decades as "news." So not only will your DH have a lesser sex life, it is likely that he will have a shorter sex life. Not only that, but male circumcision has also been implicated in female sexual dysfunction at and after menopause, just about the same time that the men are begining to see the effects. It's a double whammy. It gets you going and coming.





Frank

[kathy1_10]

I feel so sorry for my dh because of the problems he has had due to his circumcision. The head of his penis is always raw and dry and it looks like the doctor took off a lot skin because when he has an erection the skin is very tight and feels uncomfortable even when he is soft the skin is tight. And it looks like the doctor was either in a hurry or new at perfoming circumisions because he has very thick brown Zig-Zag scar around his penis. (I used to ask him about it, because I thought it looked like he had an accident, but he just told me that is the way he was made, but now we know the truth.)

Now that I have had a son and see how much foreskin he has I feel so bad for my dh. I wish he wasn't circumcized!!

[TigerTail]

Originally Posted by Frankly Speaking

It gets you going and coming.
Frank

:LOL suse

btw, i have had a little experience (ah, coming of age in the 70's, ahem) & they just work better intact. i have known circ'd penises, intact penises, circ'd as a teenager penises, & amonst the first & last groups there was a sad amount of erectile dysfunction. in TEENAGERS! (can you imagine what a 50 yr old penis that has trouble coming when it is 16 is going to be like?)

i hate letting the world know how many i got a good feel for (if not much else, lol) in my oat-sowing days, but in the larger cause of protecting intact babies, i'll throw myself on the grenade. they're clean, they're pretty, they're a breeze to care for in infancy (as in, just wipe off the poop!) and they WORK BETTER! in this case, anecdotal evidence IS data; i defy someone to tell me *my* study was flawed, lol.

suse

[lynsage]

yes, i do, and he is so upset about having been circed that he can't even look at the information i have tried to show him about restoring his foreskin- i think it brings up too many feelings he's not ready to deal with yet.

his dad is an MD and his parents knew when he was born that there was no medical reason to mutilate him- from what he has told me, they did it anyway because they are fundamentalist christians and they think circing is some kind of covenant with "god". barf.

all he will say when i ask him about restoring is that his penis has been through enough, and he's not doing anything else to it.

[Raven]

For his sake I do ...

nak

[Breathless Wonder]

I do, for both of us.

[Frankly Speaking]

Originally Posted by lynsage

all he will say when i ask him about restoring is that his penis has been through enough, and he's not doing anything else to it.

Actually, that is a perfectly normal and expected reaction. He knows he has been damaged and he is not willing to risk doing anything he perceives could cause further damage. Note: I did not say that was a rational or logical reaction, just normal and one of those to be observed among many.





Frank

[lynsage]

oh, i know it's normal. i'm sure i would probably feel the same way if it were me.

i was posting about it to express my sadness for him, not that i think he doesn't have every right to feel that way.

[A&A]

I've been going on and on to my dh about how sorry I feel for my nephew (who just got circ'd. ) Today he said, "what about me? Don't you ever feel sorry for me? I went through circumcision, too." I said yes, of course I feel bad for him too, but didn't know I was "allowed" to talk about his circ. (because he has told me not to.) But today I realized that he wishes he were intact, too.

And then of course I told him that my nephew's circ was much more recent, so of course he would be the object of my concern at this time.

[Mommiska]

Frank - do you have the link to the 1999 Laumann study? I've looked and looked on the Internet, and I can only find links to the 1997 study. :

My dh is intact, and I am so grateful - both because of the way it works , and because it would make me so sad to think that he had been put through circumcision as an infant.

My ds is intact, of course. But I worry for my daughters. I live in the UK, so if they marry someone from the UK, he'll be intact. But I'm American, and they have dual nationality, so they may decide one day to move to the States - in which case, they might very well end up marrying someone who has been circed.

I just feel like throwing things and screaming at somebody when I realise how many people are STILL doing this to their sons in the States. I just blows my mind. They are messing with their son's and their son's partner's future sex lives (as is obvious from this thread)...how can anyone think they have the right to do this to someone ELSE?

[Frankly Speaking]

Originally Posted by Mommiska

Frank - do you have the link to the 1999 Laumann study? I've looked and looked on the Internet, and I can only find links to the 1997 study. :

No, I don't. It was once available on the AMA site but now, they charge for access. Both the 1997 and 1999 studies were once available at CIRP but apparently there was a problem with copyrights and now all that is available is a brief summary of the research. However, there is other research available on the topic that I will get for you. Like you, my hard drive is jam packed and I'm going to have to search for it.



Frank