or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Understanding Circumcision › Why are you against circumcision?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why are you against circumcision?

post #1 of 51
Thread Starter 
I have been reading this board for a while, and have been surprised by the reasoning for why many here became anti circ. Many seem to be against it because they found out that it may cause harm. For example parents who circ their first son find out that circing could be harmful, so they decide to not to do it to their second. But does that mean they would circ their future boys if it did not cause harm? I ask this because personally I believe above all else the most important point here is that boys are having their basic human rights taken away from them. Are there people here who would not be anti circumcision if the process did not cause any physical harm?
post #2 of 51
I'm anti-circ for human rights reasons, too. I don't support the non-consensual mutilation of anyone's body.

It is hard for me to envision a hypothetical situation in which physical harm would not be part of the picture, so I really can't answer that part.
post #3 of 51
It is hard to seperate the two.

How can you forcibly remove a part of someone else's genitals without causing physical harm?

It's pretty much hand in hand.

But to answer your question: Yes, if chopping off someone's foreskin was all daisies and felt like rainbows fluttering on the person's body I would still be against it seeing how it's not actually my penis and not actually my decision.
post #4 of 51
I'm pretty sure the vast majority here believe that it is the right of the boy to do what he wishes with his own body. But so many other reasons are mentioned because some people don't accept that reasoning, so if you have lists and lists of reasons why not to circ, then perhaps someone who is intent on circ'ing, or thinks it's no big deal, might possibly be swayed.

I simply think natural is best and it never made sense to me to cut a baby at birth, or any time thereafter.
post #5 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by To-Fu View Post
I'm anti-circ for human rights reasons, too. I don't support the non-consensual mutilation of anyone's body.

It is hard for me to envision a hypothetical situation in which physical harm would not be part of the picture, so I really can't answer that part.
Well there are parents on this board who circumcised their first son, knowing that THEY were modifying their sons body forever, yet thought they were not doing any physical harm. But once they found out they might be causing physical harm, they became anti- circ. That makes it seem like those parents do not see it as a human rights issue. They did not see their son had a right to his full penis. If they did see it as their son had that right, then I would imagine they would have never cut their first son.
post #6 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverSky View Post
I'm pretty sure the vast majority here believe that it is the right of the boy to do what he wishes with his own body. But so many other reasons are mentioned because some people don't accept that reasoning, so if you have lists and lists of reasons why not to circ, then perhaps someone who is intent on circ'ing, or thinks it's no big deal, might possibly be swayed.

I simply think natural is best and it never made sense to me to cut a baby at birth, or any time thereafter.
I guess my question should be directed at parents who circumcised their first son, but not their second.
post #7 of 51
Why would anyone circumcise, it's totally unnecessary surgery. Never mind if it wouldn't 'hurt', it's still totally crazy to do that to an infant. Why not give them nosejobs and face lifts while they are days old too?
post #8 of 51
Inherently I was afraid of something going wrong. When I separated myself from the cultural brainwashing that it must be done, I saw it for what it really is, which is the loss of bodily sovereignty and human rights violation that choosing to alter someone else's body really is.
post #9 of 51
i am against circumcising anyone that cannot consent to or want to be circumcised.for all of the reasons everyone here has said plus these.

i was circumcised at birth and it has caused me physical and mental problems.

circumcision is not completely reversable.

the multiple surgeries that can replace some of what circumcision removes cost about $120,000.00. if a man wants this done he would have to sacrifice alot in life or be very rich.

restitution for circumcision is impossible after the age of 19 because of the statute of limitations.how many men at that age know what has caused their problem?especially if their parents and doctors told them they would outgrow them.


most intact men and women choose to stay uncircumcised.if circumcision was so great why don't they feel cheated?
post #10 of 51

Reason

I saw it as a student in 1989 and cried for days afterword and had the doc talk about it like he was not causing any harm. The baby cried so hard he passed out. I could not work as an L&D nurse either since, though I loved maternal child health, I could not stomach all the mutilation/pain imposed on almost all women (vacuums, episiotomies, cesareans and unnatural pushing).
Mutilation is mutilation and when it is unnecessary as circing is, I am against it.
post #11 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by perspective View Post
Well there are parents on this board who circumcised their first son, knowing that THEY were modifying their sons body forever, yet thought they were not doing any physical harm. But once they found out they might be causing physical harm, they became anti- circ. That makes it seem like those parents do not see it as a human rights issue. They did not see their son had a right to his full penis. If they did see it as their son had that right, then I would imagine they would have never cut their first son.
The thing is, most people are convinced by doctors, parents, society at large that circ'ing isn't just neutral and cosmetic, but positive and saving their child from HIV/penile cancer/UTI's etc. It's not that they think their son doesn't have the right to a whole penis, but that they think they are protecting their son from health problems. Sometimes it isn't until the layers are peeled away and mothers realize that it is at best not helpful and at the worst actually causes harm that they even start to contemplate the larger issues of consent and human rights.
post #12 of 51
this is why:

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=781890

in short because its a violation of human rights its barbaric and unnecessary cosmetic surgery on an un-consenting person.
post #13 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by perspective View Post
Well there are parents on this board who circumcised their first son, knowing that THEY were modifying their sons body forever, yet thought they were not doing any physical harm. But once they found out they might be causing physical harm, they became anti- circ. That makes it seem like those parents do not see it as a human rights issue. They did not see their son had a right to his full penis. If they did see it as their son had that right, then I would imagine they would have never cut their first son.
See second quote.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eclipse View Post
The thing is, most people are convinced by doctors, parents, society at large that circ'ing isn't just neutral and cosmetic, but positive and saving their child from HIV/penile cancer/UTI's etc. It's not that they think their son doesn't have the right to a whole penis, but that they think they are protecting their son from health problems. Sometimes it isn't until the layers are peeled away and mothers realize that it is at best not helpful and at the worst actually causes harm that they even start to contemplate the larger issues of consent and human rights.
I circed both my boys. I DO VERY MUCH see it as a human rights issue. I thought I was HELPING. That is possible.
post #14 of 51
Circumcision done for cosmetic reasons (in other words, if it isn't part of your religion) is barbaric and unnecessary. It causes pain to an infant who has no choice in the matter.
post #15 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by perspective View Post
I have been reading this board for a while, and have been surprised by the reasoning for why many here became anti circ. Many seem to be against it because they found out that it may cause harm. For example parents who circ their first son find out that circing could be harmful, so they decide to not to do it to their second. But does that mean they would circ their future boys if it did not cause harm? I ask this because personally I believe above all else the most important point here is that boys are having their basic human rights taken away from them. Are there people here who would not be anti circumcision if the process did not cause any physical harm?
Good questions.

Firstly, it's hard for me to fathom amputating up to half of the skin on the penis including oodles of blood vessels and nerves, so there's no independently mobile skin as not causing harm even if he's one of the rare boys that escapes immediate or long-term surgical complications. The permanent loss of healthy tissue is inherently harmful. Sadly, common sense isn't always common.

Secondly, as with any medical procedure-prophylactic or otherwise-the ethical test is whether the potential benefits outweigh the known risks and harms. Routine infant circumcision definitely doesn't meet that criteria when you consider the guaranteed toss of sensitivity and sexual function -and- the immediate surgical risks (hemorrhage, infection, death) -and- the long-term complications like a 71% risk of penile adhesions, a 10% risk of meatal stenosis, and at least a 1% chance of recircumcision/revision.

Circumcision is primarily a cosmetic surgery and it's performed on the most intimate part of a future man's body at the most vulnerable time in his life. Why should parents have a right to take needles, clamps, and scalpels to their perfectly healthy children's private parts?

If it's a human rights atrocity to make even a minor surgical alteration to a little girl's genitals-universally condemned as female genital mutilation (FGM)-why in the name of equality and reason is doing the same thing to a restrained little boy upheld as just another ho-hum parenting choice?

Circumcision isn't just about pain.

Circumcision isn't just about harm.

Circumcision is about human rights, body autonomy, gender equality,
and freedom of choice for the person the body part belongs to.

WE DO NOT OWN OUR CHILDREN.

Jen
post #16 of 51
because my little boy is beautiful just exactly as he was born!

i had no idea how passionately i would feel about this issue until i started looking at all the info on here. now it makes me feel sick that i almost snipped him w/out even questioning it!
and my husband is jewish and i had to convince him ( pretty easy) and we had to tell the grandparents (not happy).
but ultimately it's his body if HE want's to be circ'ed he can do it when he's older and can have proper pain mgmnt.
post #17 of 51
Circ always does harm.

The real question is why does anyone support it?

It makes me think of the Emporers new clothes story.

It should be commonsense that it inherently ridiculous,
(the emporer is not wearing any clothes), but because
other people (in the US) are doing it there is an assumption
that there must be something in it.
post #18 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by perspective View Post
I guess my question should be directed at parents who circumcised their first son, but not their second.
Quote:
“I don't know if I continue, even today, always liking myself. But what I learned to do many years ago was to forgive myself. It is very important for every human being to forgive herself or himself because if you live, you will make mistakes- it is inevitable. But once you do and you see the mistake, then you forgive yourself and say, 'well, if I'd known better I'd have done better,' that's all. So you say to people who you think you may have injured, 'I'm sorry,' and then you say to yourself, 'I'm sorry.' If we all hold on to the mistake, we can't see our own glory in the mirror because we have the mistake between our faces and the mirror; we can't see what we're capable of being. You can ask forgiveness of others, but in the end the real forgiveness is in one's own self. I think that young men and women are so caught by the way they see themselves. Now mind you. When a larger society sees them as unattractive, as threats, as too black or too white or too poor or too fat or too thin or too sexual or too asexual, that's rough. But you can overcome that. The real difficulty is to overcome how you think about yourself. If we don't have that we never grow, we never learn, and sure as hell we should never teach.”
-Maya Angelou
Most parents I've encountered who regret circumcising their sons honestly didn't realize or understand the full extent or inherent, irreversible harm every circumcision causes. So, they are often the first to say "I had no idea it was so damaging!" It it were merely painful & unnecessary and didn't have any impact on sensitivity or sexual function it might not elicit quite as much guilt.

Jen
post #19 of 51

Help Me

wat do i do if me 13year old son is still not reacile yet, wat shall i do he is very upset and embaresed i need some good advice.:
post #20 of 51
We originally decided not to circ our first boy simply because of the pain. I believed that if I was going to expose my baby to that much pain and trauma, there would have to be a life or death reason to do so, and there was not.

Nearly six years (and a lot of research) later, and the pain is still very much a part of the argument, and extremely compelling, but it is not the whole argument.

A child has a right to his whole body, and to his full sexuality. Someone needs to defend that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Understanding Circumcision
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Understanding Circumcision › Why are you against circumcision?