Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › Funny Story about not circumcising
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Funny Story about not circumcising  

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
As the birth of my second son approaches, I have been thinking back to the birth of my first son.

After my 1st was born he was taken to the nursury for tests. My DH went out with him and my mom and grandmother were there.

my DH told me of a funny conversation between my mom and grandmother

my mom(critically)
: What? He's not going to be circumsized?
my grandmother to my mom: Your father wasn't circumsized.
my mom:

Suprising all around, I was expecting alot of grief about our decision, since my mom and grandmother often disagree with me. I have never heard a peep about the issue since!
post #2 of 20
Cool!
post #3 of 20
post #4 of 20
Way to go, Grandma!
post #5 of 20
Lucky Grandma! heehee
post #6 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by My2Matthews
Lucky Grandma! heehee
for real :LOL
post #7 of 20
Grandma rocks!!!
post #8 of 20
Great story!

I imagine that most families in the US are like that--the oldest living generation in the family is intact, and the next generatoin (men in their 50' or younger) is circumcised. I wonder what would have happened if our grandmothers had spoken up when circumcision was forced upon their children and grandchildren.
post #9 of 20
OMG. That is truly hilarious. FIL isn't circed, either-- a similar convo took place when he casually "reminded" my very anxious MIL of that fact.

She was utterly flustered.

He was a homebirthed baby, too. Funny how things come full circle in a couple of generations.
post #10 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Pickle
I wonder what would have happened if our grandmothers had spoken up when circumcision was forced upon their children and grandchildren.
We would have only had the joke of "informed consent" sooner. Finally after about 30 or 40 years of doctors just circumcising boys without permission or against parents implicit instructions not to circumcise, someone finally took a doctor to court for this practice and won. That was in the early 1970's and that court case is why they always get informed consent now and why some practically beg you to let them circumcise your son instead of just doing it.

The real turning point of circumcision was the advent of the internet and vast numbers of people getting access to accurate information. That's something Grandma didn't have in her arsenal.




Frank
post #11 of 20
Also, don't forget that Grandma was probably put under general anesthesia for her birth. Afterwards, the baby was kept in the nursery for 24 hours. By the time Grandma got to see her newborn infant son, he was already circumcised.

In any case, she was in no condition to accept or refuse anything. Grandpa coudn't help her, either, since men were not allowed in the delivery room with their wives in those days.

This is how circ. was forced on the general population.
post #12 of 20
Thread Starter 
Quote:

I imagine that most families in the US are like that--the oldest living generation in the family is intact, and the next generatoin (men in their 50' or younger) is circumcised. I wonder what would have happened if our grandmothers had spoken up when circumcision was forced upon their children and grandchildren.
Today 12:38 PM
What the heck happened to force this change..it still baffles me..


Yes, as for births back in the 40's and 50's, the same grandmother told me how her doctor said she should try smoking to prevent weight gain . She said she couldn't even stand the smell of it at the time.

Her older sister got pregnant around the same time and asked her doc about breastfeeding. He replied something along the lines that breasts were for men's pleasure, formula would be just fine for the baby.

Crazy, huh?
post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by njeb
Also, don't forget that Grandma was probably put under general anesthesia for her birth. Afterwards, the baby was kept in the nursery for 24 hours. By the time Grandma got to see her newborn infant son, he was already circumcised.

In any case, she was in no condition to accept or refuse anything. Grandpa coudn't help her, either, since men were not allowed in the delivery room with their wives in those days.

This is how circ. was forced on the general population.
My grandma had no meds at all for all 3 of her births. In the 50's. She didn't want them and they didn't push it. All 3 of her boys were circ'd though. And she gave me and my sister a hard time abot not circing our kids. Not nearly as hard a time as our parents, but still...
post #14 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by melissa_honeybee
What the heck happened to force this change..it still baffles me..
The first half of the last century was a pretty amazing time. Technology moved forward more during that 50 years than in all of history before that. Just think, before, all movement was by horse, sailing ship or at the very last, train and the trains were such low technology that they moved by sheer force instead of technology. We learned how to move rapidly over the face of the earth or above it in airplanes. We went from mostly working to feed ourselves from the land to factories. We learned how to make steel and we conquered electricity. We learned to talk with each other by wire rather than face to face. Before this time, doctors mostly set broken bones and stitched up wounds and medicine and witchdoctors had much in common outside that. There were so many advancements in sicience in that short time that it was impossible to keep up with them. It was a constant marvel. We also have to remember that the scientific method of research was not very scientific at the time. If you did action "A" and result "B" happened, it was concluded that "B" was the result of "A" when it was very possible that the two events had nothing to do with each other. Thus, if you circumcised a 7 year old boy and he quit wetting the bed, it was concluded that the circumcision cured the bed wetting instead of the two events being totally unrelated. In this example, the doctor would report that circumcision cured bedwetting.

Also remember that during that time, the general populace had very little medical knowledge at all and very little opportunity to research to evaluate what they were told. At that time, many couldn't even read and it was very common that people had no more than a 3rd or 4th grade education. With this lack of education and lack of resources, a doctor was probably the most highly educated man in most smaller towns. Back then, many lawyers got their legal education by clerking for a judge or assisting a lawyer in an apprenticeship arrangement and may not even have a 4 year college degree. Just in the last year, one of these judges retired from the bench in my hometown. Before becoming a judge, he had been a prize fighter!

In this environment, if a doctor told you something, it was accepted at face value and without question. I remember when I was young, many people died of "old age." This was given as the cause of death because the doctors didn't have the diagnostic equipment or knowledge to diagnose many of the problems that seniors suffer and it was very common that someone would die of one of these maladies without ever being diagnosed. For instance, they didn't know what alzhiemers disease was. People who were suffering from this were said to be senile, childish or forgetful as a result of old age and they eventually died of "old age." Of course, now we know that everything they were telling us about circumcision was false, we can clearly see that this was from ignorance but in that day and time and with the level of education among both the medical profession and laypeople, it is easy to see how this came to be. The problem is that there is still a tremendous level of ignorance that persists in both the medical profession and the general populace and we seem dedicated in continuing the ignorance instead of learning.

The primary reason for this ignorance is the continuing ignorance of the medical profession. When doctors have the opportunity to study to learn to cure cancer or other "glamorous" diseases, there is not much of an incentive to research something as accepted as circumcision. It is also difficult for a male doctor who is circumcised to accept that he has been damaged by circumcision since as far as he can tell, his penis works perfectly fine. There is also the factor that the vast majority of neonatal circumcisions are performed by OB/GYNS who are specialists in the female reproductive organs and have little professional interest in researching the form and function of the male reproductive organ so the ignorance persists. I also have to wonder about the trend for an increasingly larger percentage of OB/GYNS and pediatricians being females instead of males and the effect that has on the practice.

So, to put it into a nutshell, Dr. Lewis A.J. Sayre of Philadelphia decided that circumcision would stop boys from masturbating and circumcised a boy. Whether he actually stopped masturbating or not is up to question. Maybe, he was just very careful after that but Sayre thought he had been successful and began reporting it widely. As other doctors picked up the trend, they observed other miraculous cures that probably had just run their course and would have ended anyway and they attributed the cure to the circumcision. In this hysteria, they eventually got to the point that they would hypothesize that circumcision would prevent something with no research at all and spread that around. This became "common knowledge" in the medical profession although it had no scientific basis at all and then it was spread to the general populace where it became "common knowledge." Eventually, as that common knowledge was refuted, it was realized that circumcision of male infants is an incredibly lucrative medical practice with recently reported prices of up to $700.00 per procedure that only takes a few minutes. Under these circumstances, it is predictable that the medical profession is going to continue to promote it for their own enrichment. Now that the medical "benefits" have all been disproven, medical practitioners only have the "tradition" of circumcision to fall back on if they find a parent that has any background at all. "If the father was circumcised, it is very important that the son be circumcised or he could suffer from severe psychological problems." Of course, the men who were circumcised and their fathers were not circumcised had no psychological problems because of it but this is something that is lost on the vast majority of parents and parents don't want their child to be emotionally scarred for life so they acquiesce to the procedure for their sons and the torture and mutilation continues.




Frank
post #15 of 20
Just want to point out that there are M.D.s out there who are vociferously anti-circ. My ped in Oklahoma City was very happy with our decision not to, and the practice we go to here hands out educational literature promoting keeping boys intact. (The OKC doc didn't give us an indication about his feelings until he saw that we weren't going to, then his face lit up and he said, "Oh thank goodness! I hate doing that!" so he wasn't so vociferous, I guess. He felt like he had to accept whatever the parents chose.)
post #16 of 20
What an eloquent post, Frank!
post #17 of 20
Thank you Emily!



Frank
post #18 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Divina
so he wasn't so vociferous, I guess. He felt like he had to accept whatever the parents chose.)
I suspect that many doctors are afraid to approach the issue for fear that they will offend a patient and fear that an offended patient is a patient that will find a doctor who will not offend her. That means a patient lost along with that patient's money that they will no longer get. In other words, they will sell out their morals and ethics and another man's rights and sexuality for mere money in their bank account.

No doctor is required to take a patient that they don't want and they have no legal, moral or professional obligation to perform an elective procedure they don't want to perform.




Frank
post #19 of 20
I can't tell you how many of my teen moms say that they want their son circumcised because their baby's dads are and they don't want their son to feel bad or wonder why their penis is different from daddy's.
I just tell them that a father who compares genitals with a child might have other serious problems. I ask them if they compare genitals with their daughters or if their mother compared genitals with them. They always say, "NO! That's gross!"
"Well, why do you think it is okay to let men compare their genitals with little boys?"

That usually gets them thinking and open to discussing why they shouldn't mutilate their infant sons.
So far, very successful. Only one mom circ'ed both her sons. In both cases, she was the only mom that I wasn't able to attend the birth and arrived hours after pp. Of course, I am sure the doctors took advantage of her drug induced state, as both times she ended up with c-sections. I am still kicking myself for not being there for her.
post #20 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaInTheBoonies
I can't tell you how many of my teen moms say that they want their son circumcised because their baby's dads are and they don't want their son to feel bad or wonder why their penis is different from daddy's.
I just tell them that a father who compares genitals with a child might have other serious problems. I ask them if they compare genitals with their daughters or if their mother compared genitals with them. They always say, "NO! That's gross!"
"Well, why do you think it is okay to let men compare their genitals with little boys?"

That usually gets them thinking and open to discussing why they shouldn't mutilate their infant sons.
So far, very successful. Only one mom circ'ed both her sons. In both cases, she was the only mom that I wasn't able to attend the birth and arrived hours after pp. Of course, I am sure the doctors took advantage of her drug induced state, as both times she ended up with c-sections. I am still kicking myself for not being there for her.
WOW, thats a GREAT point, I am totally going to start using that one
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Case Against Circumcision
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › Funny Story about not circumcising