Question

[PJsmomma]

My son is circ'd. We were so new to all of this and just didn't know.

I don't mean to sound barbaric--I hope you don't take it that way. I don't have any regrets that he is not intact--I may at some point in the future.

I left it to my dh--not to sound ditzy there either--I just figured he had an opinion. (now we dont' vax and I would have never left that decision just up to him : ) so I see my silliness there.

My question is--I know that female circ is barbaric and can see why it is wrong.

So, climbing out from under a rock here---does male circ remove all the pleasure and enjoyment like female circ does?

It doesn't seem to me that it totally does kwim? My dh has a good time

If it does I think I'm going to be horrified!

[kxsiven]

There are many different types of female 'circumcision'. From just a little ritualistic scrape on genitals to 'remove it all' circumcision(around 15% of female circumcisions are this type).

Here is a list what is lost in infant male circumcision:

http://www.norm.org/lost.html

Ofcourse men who have been circumcised as infants do not know how intact penis feels and many circumcised men live they lives ok without one thought of problems down there. But many men do have problems they think are caused by aging or just 'bad luck with mother nature' when in fact the problems are caused because they were circumcised as infants.

On this site there are some pictures of the most common problems circumcision causes;

http://www.infocirc.org/townsend/problem.htm

[TenFedNed]

PJsmomma, if you see how wrong female circumcision is, what makes you think that male circ is any different?

So, climbing out from under a rock here---does male circ remove all the pleasure and enjoyment like female circ does?

You seem to care only about the pleasure loss. Don't you care about the other changes caused by circumcision?

[feebeeglee]

A comparison of male and female circumcision (no pictures, just text):
http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.html

As far as whether it affects sexual pleasure, well, 10 to 20 thousand nerves are lost.

Lost nerves = lost pleasure.

If a cut man thinks he has it good, imagine what he could have had.

A trombone plays more notes than a bugle.

I'm of the opinion that the owner of the penis and foreskin in question should decide to alter it if he wants.

[TenFedNed]

I'm of the opinion that the owner of the penis and foreskin in question should decide to alter it if he wants.

Totally agree.

[njeb]

Here's another link for you: www.**************************.
Your dh may have no problems now, but he might as he gets older. Circ'ed men become impotent at a younger age than intact ones.

[Frankly Speaking]

Originally Posted by PJsmomma

My question is--I know that female circ is barbaric and can see why it is wrong.

So, climbing out from under a rock here---does male circ remove all the pleasure and enjoyment like female circ does?

It doesn't seem to me that it totally does kwim? My dh has a good time

If it does I think I'm going to be horrified!

Malissa, you have a little false information. Female circumcision is done to remove an amount of the woman's sexuality to leave her with enough to freely reproduce but not more than what the culture deems "enough." To completely remove all pleasure and enjoyment would be detrimental to the survival of the culture. Hanny Lightfoot Klein is one of the leaders in the anti-female circumcision movement and went to Africa to research the issue. She found that most of thecircumcised women found sex pleasurable and rewarding. You can read about her research here:

http://www.fgmnetwork.org/authors/Li...experience.htm

Just as with female circumcision, the original intent of male circumcision was to remove an amount of sexuality to remove "excess sexuality" from men and leave them acceptable to society. The best information available indicates that infant male circumcision removes 50% to 60% of the man's sexuality. In younger men, this leaves him with enough to reproduce because the brain is the driving force. However, as he ages, the brain driven urges subside to varying degrees and the "reward factor" begins to kick in as the primary motivating factor. Of course, this is beyond the reproductive age, so it does not affect the survival of the culture, the same as female circumcision. However, the evidence shows that it adversely affects middle aged men and is a significant contributor to impotence. This has only recently been recognized as the time span between the circumcision and impotency is in excess of 50 years in most cases.

The male sexual experience is multi-faceted and includes a range of experiences that start from shortly after the act begins and ends with the orgasm. Circumcision doesn't have much effect on the orgasm but removes almost all of the sensations that lead up to orgasm. American men are known to rush to the orgasm and not take their time with the part of the act leading up to the orgasm. Some men have learned to be considerate to their partners and hold back on their pleasure and I commend them. However, it would be far better that they were enjoying the pre-orgasmic pleasure as much as their partner. Imagine how the sexual experience would be for you if you only enjoyed a small part of your pre-orgasmic sexual act and the orgasm was 90%+ of the overall sexual experience.

Circumcised men have a far different way of performing the sexual act than genitally intact men. That's because the physiological response of the circumcised organ has been permanently altered and the differing sexual methods are a response and adaptation to the difference.



Frank

[mattemma04]

Often a circumcised father does not know(or want to acknowledge) what circumcision does.

I would be quite angry with anyone who decided to cut off parts of MY genitals(even just a nip) because THEY thought it:

looked better
was easier to clean
was a part of MY PARENTS religion
or whatever excuse

Circumcisors are essentially saying to all men,

" Unlike girls, you men are born with really *gross* parts attached your genitals,and you are really just to stupid(compared to girls) to even manage to wash them properly.So we did you a favor by having you tied down and cut as an infant."


And some fathers... well they really don't want a child to have what they can not.

Boys are not born defective, and just like girls have a right to grow up with NORMAL genitals. The girls getting cut in other nations get cut under the same excuses we use for boys in the US. There are varying degrees of circumcision in both males and females,but when any type of circumcision is inflicted upon unconsenting children it is an injustice.

My dh also enjoys sex,but that does not mean the sex we have is normal. He lost his normal sexuality at age 5 to satisfy HIS PARENTS cultural and religious desires. I want it back-for him and for me,but it can never be. It is unfair.

A fauxskin(foreskin restoration) can never make up for all the parts lost during circumcision.

Best wishes in your continued research in this matter!

[Red Sonja]

mattemma04 - well said!

[PJsmomma]

Tenfedned wrote
You seem to care only about the pleasure loss. Don't you care about the other changes caused by circumcision?


That isn't at all what I care about. I honestly haven't looked into it. I don't know what I think or feel at this point. That was just a question.

I am not pg and probably won't be for some period of time--so since I have spent the last 4 years researching healthy pregnancy, breastfeeding, Ap, natural parenting, vaccines, nutrition, homeopathy all while starting and operating a business--I really wanted to start thinking and learning about this before I should ever face birthing another boy so I could make a better or more informed decision.

I honestly never heard about not circ. a boy until about 2 weeks before my son was born and we didn't take any time to research it at all.

Hopefully that answers your question--I really don't know anything about this issue and I came here to read and learn--honestly not to argue--I sure hope you didn't take it that way.


Frankly speaking--thanks for the info--I have read articles and seen documentaries about female circ and those stories perhaps are only the horror stories, because these women were mutilated literally and could only feel pain during sex so I did not realize that all female circ were not like that.


Thanks for all the links, I will start wading through them

[boingo82]

Malissa-

I have heard a circ'd man compared to a colorblind man.
The colorblind man can't imagine what he's missing. He looks at the world and thinks, "Well, I can't possibly be missing anything, since the light is already as bright as it can be! If things were any brighter...why, I'd be blinded!"

This is similar to the circ'd man, who thinks, "Sex is GREAT for me. I can't be missing anything....if I were any more sensitive, I'd be finished before I ever had sex!"

What neither of these men realize is that they're missing a host of beautiful sensations, some subtle, some strong. However, it's something they could never concieve unless they experienced it.



BTW, if I were you I'd be equally concerned about complications that don't show up until later. These can also have a very negative effect. Sexual sensation isn't the only long-term problem circ'd boys have.

[aira]

My dh also enjoys sex,but that does not mean the sex we have is normal. He lost his normal sexuality at age 5 to satisfy HIS PARENTS cultural and religious desires. I want it back-for him and for me,but it can never be. It is unfair.

I feel exactly the same way, except that my DH was circed when hours old and his mother just didn't think about it either way. SHe just did what was "normal".

I'm actually really quite bitter about it. I wonder not only how much better sex could've been, but how much more harmonious would our *marriage* be if the sex were more rewarding?

I totally grieve his (our) loss. I don't hold him at all accountable for not understanding normal sex. He tries to understand what makes me happy sexually, but CAN'T. It hurts us both. And doubly hurts him as he's frustrated that he doesn't feel sex like I do. Can't even imagine it.

[Frankly Speaking]

Originally Posted by PJsmomma

Frankly speaking--thanks for the info--I have read articles and seen documentaries about female circ and those stories perhaps are only the horror stories, because these women were mutilated literally and could only feel pain during sex so I did not realize that all female circ were not like that.

You have to realize that few Americans knew anything about female circumcision before 1985 when the anti-FGM movement started. There would have been a general malaise about it since it was thousands of miles away. the movement had to creat controversy to give itself legs and overstatement of the procedure and the harms was the way to do it. I don't blame them. In my book, when it is something like this, the ends justify the means. However, in today's environment, it has become counter productive as it is always used to counter those who are working against male circumcision with the assertion that the two are not comparable. That's just not true. There is far, far more that is the same than there is things that are different.

If we said that male circumcision always was painful, ended the sexuality of the man, was done with a piece of rusty metal or broken glass at the side of a dusty road, etc. that is believed by most about FGM, we would lose all credibility because most adult men in America are circumcised and people know those things are not true. However, we don't know those things are not usually true about females in Africa and because we have seen pictures and videos of fairly rare examples, we tend to believe that those extreme cases are the norm and not the exception. The truth is that in most cases, female circumcision is very similar in all respects to male circumcision in America. The main difference is our viewpoint. We minimalize what is done here and maximize what is done there.



Frank

[hummingbear]

PJsmomma

I am so sorry you did not come across this subject until the very end of your pregnancy. In my opinion, if your doctor did not inform you that circumcision is not considered medically necessary and did not inform you of what circumcision would permanently remove then I believe that she or he did you a great injustice.

To address your question "does male circ remove all the pleasure and enjoyment like female circ does? " is difficult since it compares a set of circucstances which are very difficult to evaluate to a set of circumstances which are very difficult to evaluate. There are great websites which describe what is lost to circumcision which have already been mentioned. I will edit to add any if there are any others I know of that have not been mentioned.

Here is a very palpable way of understanding the sensation which is lost to circumcision: first make a fist with one hand and then using light pressure scrape the back of that hand with a fingernail. Now compare that to opening up the hand and very lightly using a fingertip to draw circles on the palm. The differences you feel are due to the different type of nerve endings that are present. This description was recently given by Marilyn Milos, a mother and nurse who started NOCIRC. If you haven't already visited that website add it to your list: http://www.nocirc.org/

I truly honor your exploration of this subject, you are opening yourself up to someday being truly horrified.

There is a saying often quoted on this forum which goes "When you know better, you do better." - Maya Angelou
Know that in spite of what may appear to be harsh sounding responses that the folks here have really big hearts; that is what brings them here again and again.

Take care of yourself and may your exploration bring benefit to yourself and others.

[Frankly Speaking]

Ann, Here is a detailed version of what Marilyn was talking about and may have been her source.

(Reprinted with permission of Andrew C. Kursar)

"Before and After Circumcision: An Educational Model of Penile Skin Movement"
by Gary Harryman & Andrew C. Kursar

An educational exercise in two parts.

Part one -- the "gliding action":

Hold out your left hand, palm down, fingers together, flat, and pointed away from you. Place the index finger of your right hand on the back of your left hand about in the middle of the back of the palm. Press down with that index finger using moderate pressure and slide the skin on the back of the left hand around in a circle.

Notice how the skin slides smoothly over the substrate of the hand? Notice how you can feel the skin itself extending and compressing, and how you can feel it sliding against the substrate below? That's similar to what the mobile foreskin does on the erect penis; it slides all around, and up and down, in a roller-bearing fashion.

Now, while still moving the skin around in a circle, slowly close the extended fingers of your left hand into a fist. Notice how the skin under your index finger tightens up as the fingers close, and how it stops sliding around? Notice how the sensory input and your perception of it changes from the complex movement of the skin itself, and its simultaneous movement against the irregular substratum, to only frictional input from your index finger as it moves around in a circle on the back of the fist? Notice how that changes your perception and focus from the many things that are occurring under the loose skin to just the friction that is occurring under your index finger against the tight skin?

That's what happens when the foreskin is amputated -- the more severe the circumcision (that is, the greater the genital reduction), the tighter the remaining skin on the penis. The tighter the remaining skin on the penis, the less it moves. The less it moves, the more the penis receives only frictional input. The more the penis receives only frictional input, the more need there is for primarily rougher thrusting motions and a tighter fit to stimulate it.

Now, while still rubbing the index finger around on the back of the first hand, slowly unclench the fist again. Notice how the skin glides smoothly over the substrate again? Notice how you can feel the skin itself stretching and compressing, and how you can feel it sliding against the substrate below?

If you balance out the pressure you apply with your index finger against the greatest range of movement of the skin, so that the mobile skin is sliding around in a circle and the index finger is rubbing against the skin itself as well, you can feel both the skin movement itself, and the frictional input of the index finger moving against it -- simultaneously. That's what the intact foreskin normally does on the erect penis; it slides around, and up and down, in a similar fashion, and at the same time receives frictional input from the surface it is rubbing against. That unique ability is called the "gliding action" and it is the hallmark mechanical feature of the normal intact (whole) human penis. Without this gliding action, sex as nature designed it is impossible.

Part two -- innervation:

Rub the back of your hand again; then, turn your hand over and lightly rub the palm in the same way. Notice how the palm is many times more sensitive than the back of the hand, and how the sensation is qualitatively different, having much more of a tickling or tingling nature?

This is because the palm of your hand has some of the same nerves that the normal intact foreskin has, and they are between 10 and 20 times more sensitive than the nerves on the back of your hand, or those on the shaft and glans of the circumcised penis; specialized pleasure-producing nerve endings such as coiled fine-touch Meissner's corpuscles, encapsulated pressure- and vibration-sensitive Vater Pacini cells, Merkel's touch-receptor cells, temperature-sensitive nocioceptors, and branches of two nerve stems.

Through non-surgical foreskin restoration a man can reclaim most of the "Part one" experience, and, depending on how much of his original foreskin remains and if his frenulum is still intact, perhaps some of the "Part two" experience.

However, those specialized pleasure-producing nerves that have been removed, and the way in which their normal functioning would interact with the sensations of the "Part one" gliding motion, are lost forever.

Copyright 2003 Gary Harryman & Andrew C. Kursar

[PJsmomma]

thanks again all. I really do appreciate your responses--even the "harsh" ones :LOL .
I'm pretty thick skinned now--with not vaxing, not using traditional med, etc

But maybe just so you know--people who are totally new to all of this could really really be put off from searching futher if they're dumb questions are treated harshly--more flies with honey kwim? I know you're probably all tired of the same old same old ?'s
thanks again

[littlest birds]

It might put some people off, but this is about truth not about a sales pitch.

There is a simple honesty in the harshness since some of us feel strongly that circumcision is a cruel violation, a devastating abuse to which so many are apparently blind and sometimes even deliberately ignorant.

There is a great deal of justified anger.

It is the parent's task to place learning the truth as first priority, and if the harshness of individual comments here is enough to make a parent choose to cut off pieces of penis then I doubt that parent was all that interested in the first place. That would be a pretty superficial way to make such a decision, don't you think? It's the parent's responsibility to discern not to follow people like us because we talk nice...

[PJsmomma]

Hi--I am still reading. I didn't mean to imply you had to talk nice and have a sales pitch. I just already feel overwhelmed and feel like my asking questions because I didn't know and I want to know for the future means I have to bear the brunt of the justified anger that's all.

[boingo82]

Originally Posted by PJsmomma

Hi--I am still reading. I didn't mean to imply you had to talk nice and have a sales pitch. I just already feel overwhelmed and feel like my asking questions because I didn't know and I want to know for the future means I have to bear the brunt of the justified anger that's all.

While it may feel the anger is directed at you, most (if not all) of us are not angry at parents who *thought* they were doing what was best.
We are angry at the doctors who SHOULD know better, who are PAID to know better, and who do this anyway.
Every time we hear from a parent who circ'd we are reminded how corrupt many doctors are. I know it gets me all riled up again. So it may seem I'm angry at the parents. I'm not. It's just that you remind to be angry again...

http://mothering.com/discussions/sho...d.php?t=112410
Please, read this thread if you haven't. There are lots of moms here who circ'd. Some posted on this thread, I believe. They aren't angry at you, but angry to find one more person (you) who has been misled by society, who's had this option offered up to you like it's NORMAL.
I think we're angry on your behalf, your son's behalf. I hope that makes sense.

[littlest birds]

I was grouchy. Sorry.

I think it is great that you seek to learn and that you question... I think a lot of us have found it frustrating and deeply painful to know so many children are being hurt in this way. It is difficult when a careful communication of the harm being done IRL is ignored by someone we care about and we are stuck with this image of their child's pain and alteration in our mind...

I have never heard a single reason for infant circumcision that I believe is provable or true and makes anything about it seem right to me. I simply do not comprehend it. If I look at "Why?" and "Why not?" all the sense seems to be on the "not" side--there isn't a single reason why that is worth a child's flesh.

It is easy for me to understand someone allowing a circ just because it seemed normal and the doctor or nurses made it sound like it is and should be routine... Or because of misinformation... But I feel deeply that every infant circ is on some level a mistake. Some people find out they made a mistake, some people never do.