The In-crowd Mentality

[MommytoB]

I been going around in my mind thinking alot are show off to show off an expensive car/dog/clothes/kids for all people to be like act alike . My mom even lives in the in-crowd moment as showing off her house,athletic abilties when she has a hurt knee,taking expensive trips ,showing off her retirement time and trying to get me to be like other ppl my age. stating I'm not fitting into the crowd because I don't have the appropiate style as in clothes. she's already fearing my son won't be fitting in the in-crowd always fearing something is wrong or claiming he has allergies to the cat which she doesn't like.


So, I was thinking after my friend told me she & her grandaughter were helping at the spay & neuter clinic of 80 cats. I said did you see that bad breeder on kulr 8 she said yes they were selling them for fifteen hundred dollars I go I don't get it why do people want to spend 500 to fifteen hundred dollars for a future pet when you can get a pet from a shelter or rescue for under one hundred dollars of all kinds & even possible more than one under one hundred dollars I rescued 2 cats it only cost me 80 bucks. She goes prestige as in needing a for sure purebred for dog shows/cat shows or to be able to brag about their type of pet

Then I was going hmm makes more sense of circumcision being in the in-crowd than having illogical fear the only illogical fear they have is by being different for other because they spend 300-500 dollars for a circumcision to be accepted by parents ,family, their friends ,peers . If possible even for fear of a foreskin problem that would come down the road not realizing if a foreskin problem did come down the road it would only cost 3 to 5 dollars to treat a foreskin issue like bacterial/yeast infection only if you find the right doctor .

[New_Natural_Mom]

I think guys in particular are very sensitive about their penis and that "penis comparison" is very culturally ingrained in the US. "Looking like everyone else" was one of my husband's arguments for circ. I then explained that the statistics have now swayed where over half of boys (and almost 80%) in some states are uncirced. Also, one of my most strident points was hey, if a girl doesn't like it or thinks it is gross - is she really someone we want with our son? I sure don't.

And on the topic of purebred animals - they need homes too! We took home both our gorgeous girls from a breeder 6 hours away because I knew exactly what breed I wanted and they are just VERY difficult to find b/c they are so dang great. If there is a certain breed that would work best for a family you go where you find them. BUT - I hate when people pay $1200 for a "Labradoodle". That is not a real breed - it drives me crazy - go to a shelter if you want a mix! Not sure if it is the same for cats and cat breeds though.

[Greg B]

In addition, there are other factors too working. As someone recently pointed out, when circ got started, they actualy had to buck the trend and agree to be different....

So while this idea of being part of the in group, being accepted is important for explaining, in part, why there is current pressure to continue RIC, it is also importent to ponder the other reasons. It was not the first reason, and so is likely not the only current driver.

Regards

[Frankly Speaking]

Mommy2B, you're on to something here!

When circumcision got started in The US, few hospitals existed and those that did were only in large cities. Most Moms gave birth at home, especially those in small towns and rural settings and many in the cities did. Initially at least, it was only urban and "upper crust" families that gave birth in hospitals and it was those boys that were at most risk of being circumcised. Boys in small towns and who had poor or average status families weren't exposed to the risk of the hospital and were seldom circumcised. However, boys in cities who were the sons of prosperous parents such as doctors, lawyers and business entreprenuers were at great risk and this is how it got started.

Once one of these familes circumcised their son, they set the "status standard" and other families emulated their actions to achieve the false status. This quickly filtered down the social spectrum. It was a indicator of class status. Intactness quickly became associated with class status and intact boys/men were automatically assumed to be from meager or rural beginings.

That all changed. With the "circ 'em all" mentality of the medical profession of the 1940's thru the early 1970's and the advent of Medicaid in the 1960's, circumcision lost all class distinctions. However, that is changing again. Before the mid 1980's, the circumcision rate of black US babies trailed the circumcision rate of white US babies but that changed in the mid 1980's and since then, the circumcision rate of blacks is higher than of white babies. Then, in the 1990's, the internet became available and educated/prosperous parents adopted it in huge numbers and they discovered the issue of circumcision and again, it is in a state of flux with the higher educated/ more prosperous parents rejecting circumcision while parents without internet access continue to circumcise. Evidence of this is shown in states were Medicaid funding for circumcision has been discontinued. In Florida for example, when the state legislature ended Medicaid funding, the circumcision rate dropped by almost 1/3 in a single year.

Hopefully, in the future there will be no class distinction perceptions with circumcision at all. That is one of the worst reasons (justifications) to do it of all.



Frank

[mntnmom]

The only reason my dad was circ'd was that Grandmother was a "social climber" and he was born in 1948. My older uncle, born in Kentucky in 1935 was left intact. It's born out by evidence that the "lower classes" will follow suit on almost any fashion that their "betters" engage in.
That's why I hope we get a couple VOCAL celebrity intactivists!!

[Organicavocado]

Originally Posted by New_Natural_Mom

And on the topic of purebred animals - they need homes too! We took home both our gorgeous girls from a breeder 6 hours away because I knew exactly what breed I wanted and they are just VERY difficult to find b/c they are so dang great. If there is a certain breed that would work best for a family you go where you find them. BUT - I hate when people pay $1200 for a "Labradoodle". That is not a real breed - it drives me crazy - go to a shelter if you want a mix! Not sure if it is the same for cats and cat breeds though.

Yep. We paid $600 a pop for our two purebred kitties. 1. I bought from a breeder who breeds for show cats and sells the not-perfect kittens (they always happen even from the best parents) at a discounted price without show papers and spayed/neutered.. and 2. with health records for the last 4 generations (they were also weaned by MAMA, not by US! I really loved the breeder and wanted to support her ethics.). I have two immunosupressed cats already and adopting from a shelter didn't work for our family.. we needed animals that we were sure were healthy. Our previous rescue racked up over $2,000 in vet bills because of all the illnesses he had.. half of them he got from my roommate's shelter cat. The kittens? Nothing, nada, no issues at all... they don't even catch the sicknesses the other two sometimes relapse into. (Sidenote, I chose the breed because they are laid-back and I've had Ragdoll mixes before. It's still a new breed and I wanted to support good breeding... it wasn't so much that I wanted them for status though, so I can't comment there! But I do know people who have gone out of their way to buy Bengals or Persians because they were the "thing" to have.)

So, when it's what you want and what you think you "need" for your family, money doesn't seem to be the *big* issue. I think very few people would avoid circing (if they WANTED to and could reasonably afford to) because of saving money... unless they were uneducated that it would cost them in the first place and they were unprepared for it? As far as "fads" go, that I agree with. I do think it will come to an end, it's just a long bumpy nasty road as body-modification "fads" tend to stick around for a very very long time.

[Arduinna]

I don't think circ in general has anything to do with being part of the "in" crowd. I do think it effects certain groups that circ, though. Sure for fetishers it's an in crowd thing, but I think the vast majority of people that circ do so because it's what they know and are comfortable with. There is also a very high rate of people feeling like their kids are their personal property and as such they think they have a parental right to mutilate their child.

Don't buy it for pets either. Most people I know with purebreds have them because they want a dog with the traits of the breed. A mutt is a total unknown as far as traits, tendancies and if it's a puppy size. And I don't consider planned cross breedings to be mutts.

[Frankly Speaking]

Originally Posted by mntnmom

The only reason my dad was circ'd was that Grandmother was a "social climber" and he was born in 1948. My older uncle, born in Kentucky in 1935 was left intact. It's born out by evidence that the "lower classes" will follow suit on almost any fashion that their "betters" engage in.
That's why I hope we get a couple VOCAL celebrity intactivists!!

That's exactly how circumcision got started in my family. Only the years are different. My Dad also had 6 brothers who were left intact.


Frank

[Frankly Speaking]

Originally Posted by Arduinna

I don't think circ in general has anything to do with being part of the "in" crowd. I do think it effects certain groups that circ, though. Sure for fetishers it's an in crowd thing, but I think the vast majority of people that circ do so because it's what they know and are comfortable with. There is also a very high rate of people feeling like their kids are their personal property and as such they think they have a parental right to mutilate their child.

What they know and are comfortable with is what their group of friends do and that makes it "following the crowd." My grandmother followed an upwardly mobile group of influential people. Those people circumcised and to her it was the "in" thing to do. She was born in the mid-late 1890's and married my grandfather when she was young so it is almost impossible that she had ever seen a circumcised adult man. She gave birth to my father at home and took him in for his circumcision a month or so later. The purpose of the trip to the doctor was for the express purpose to have him circumcised. Where on earth did she get this idea? Obviously, she observed that her group of friends had their sons circumcised and decided to follow their lead. She followed the in crowd!



Frank

[trmpetplaya]

Absolutely! If you read the book Milk, Money, and Madness you'll see that the same following of trends happened with formula-feeding by choice as well. Wealthy folks were the ones who could afford wet nurses and then were also the ones who could afford formula soon after it was developed. Then people were told that formula-feeding was superior and nearly everyone started doing it. I believe that in both the case of formula-feeding by choice and the case of routine circumcision, the prior social status (being seen as something wealthy - assumed to be well-educated - people chose to do) helped to promote the "it's superior" and "it's cleaner" arguments respectively. Not to even mention the attitudes toward both the breasts and genital area which also helped to contribute.

It isn't even a class thing now, as Frank pointed out. Many (I might say most) parents do what their friends do and what they've seen done because that's what they're comfortable with In all probability, these same people would leave their sons intact if all their friends did and if that's what they were comfortable with. It doesn't make them bad people to follow the crowd - I, at least, am not intending to denigrate anyone who follows the crowd. They just happen to be comfortable with what they're familiar with, as most people are.

In my town (in the pacific NW), followers have a very good chance of leaving their sons intact because people here don't circumcise as a general rule. It's the "in thing" to not circumcise around here, which is great!

Oh, just to continue a bit off topic, it is definitely the "in thing" in my town to own purebred mutts. They don't have as many problems as purebreds who have been bred exclusively to their detriment, and yet their parentage is guaranteed. These purebred mutts can cost well above $1k and there are breeders who exclusively breed these expensive mutts purposefully to sell.

I prefer free, accidentally bred mutts, myself, but then again, I have never been a follower and am quite the tightwad as well

love and peace.

[Arduinna]

Originally Posted by Frankly Speaking

What they know and are comfortable with is what their group of friends do and that makes it "following the crowd." My grandmother followed an upwardly mobile group of influential people. Those people circumcised and to her it was the "in" thing to do. She was born in the mid-late 1890's and married my grandfather when she was young so it is almost impossible that she had ever seen a circumcised adult man. She gave birth to my father at home and took him in for his circumcision a month or so later. The purpose of the trip to the doctor was for the express purpose to have him circumcised. Where on earth did she get this idea? Obviously, she observed that her group of friends had their sons circumcised and decided to follow their lead. She followed the in crowd!



Frank

The "in" crowd is not the same as what I know and am used to. The "in" crowd implies the "I want to be cool" mentality. I don't think the majority of mutilators are doing it to be cool, except for the fetishers I mentioned.

And FTR I'm not talking about 150 years ago, I'm talking now.

[fruitful womb]

Originally Posted by trmpetplaya

Absolutely! If you read the book Milk, Money, and Madness you'll see that the same following of trends happened with formula-feeding by choice as well. Wealthy folks were the ones who could afford wet nurses and then were also the ones who could afford formula soon after it was developed. Then people were told that formula-feeding was superior and nearly everyone started doing it. I believe that in both the case of formula-feeding by choice and the case of routine circumcision, the prior social status (being seen as something wealthy - assumed to be well-educated - people chose to do) helped to promote the "it's superior" and "it's cleaner" arguments respectively. Not to even mention the attitudes toward both the breasts and genital area which also helped to contribute.

It isn't even a class thing now, as Frank pointed out. Many (I might say most) parents do what their friends do and what they've seen done because that's what they're comfortable with In all probability, these same people would leave their sons intact if all their friends did and if that's what they were comfortable with. It doesn't make them bad people to follow the crowd - I, at least, am not intending to denigrate anyone who follows the crowd. They just happen to be comfortable with what they're familiar with, as most people are.

In my town (in the pacific NW), followers have a very good chance of leaving their sons intact because people here don't circumcise as a general rule. It's the "in thing" to not circumcise around here, which is great!

Oh, just to continue a bit off topic, it is definitely the "in thing" in my town to own purebred mutts. They don't have as many problems as purebreds who have been bred exclusively to their detriment, and yet their parentage is guaranteed. These purebred mutts can cost well above $1k and there are breeders who exclusively breed these expensive mutts purposefully to sell.

I prefer free, accidentally bred mutts, myself, but then again, I have never been a follower and am quite the tightwad as well

love and peace.

Wow! You've written an excellent post!

[Frankly Speaking]

Originally Posted by trmpetplaya

Absolutely! If you read the book Milk, Money, and Madness you'll see that the same following of trends happened with formula-feeding by choice as well. Wealthy folks were the ones who could afford wet nurses and then were also the ones who could afford formula soon after it was developed. Then people were told that formula-feeding was superior and nearly everyone started doing it. I believe that in both the case of formula-feeding by choice and the case of routine circumcision, the prior social status (being seen as something wealthy - assumed to be well-educated - people chose to do) helped to promote the "it's superior" and "it's cleaner" arguments respectively. Not to even mention the attitudes toward both the breasts and genital area which also helped to contribute.

It isn't even a class thing now, as Frank pointed out. Many (I might say most) parents do what their friends do and what they've seen done because that's what they're comfortable with In all probability, these same people would leave their sons intact if all their friends did and if that's what they were comfortable with. It doesn't make them bad people to follow the crowd - I, at least, am not intending to denigrate anyone who follows the crowd. They just happen to be comfortable with what they're familiar with, as most people are.

This classism (is that a word?) is still alive and well in some quarters. Edgar Schoen, one of the most ardent promoters of circumcision has said that the lower circumcision rate on the west coast is purely the result of recent immigrants to the area and that the circumcision rate among whites/native born Americans is actually increasing. This is statistically impossible! It would indicate that 7 out of 10 people living in the west coast region are recent immigrants and that is just not true. What Schoen is trying to do is classify immigrants in a poor light (ie, poor, uneducated, dirty, etc.) and not a group whose lead we should follow. Contrary to his opinion, a survey was done at one of the prestigious universities (UCLA Berkely?) where it was found that the circumcision rate was very, very low among the faculty there.

Despite the impossibility and despite contrary evidence, I have seen parents who intended to circumcise use this as justification. The actual fact is that recent immigrant population circumcision rates are the fastest growing of all. The circumcision rate among hispanics is up more than 300% and among immigrants from India it is up more than 800%. To me, this appears to be the medical profession taking advantage of susceptible populations for their agenda or financial benefit.



Frank

[mrspineau]

Well. I spent 1500 on my dog, and it is NOT a purebread, its a scruffy looking dog, and the only thing special about him is that we fell in love with him when we saw him. So I don't know if that's fair to say that the only reason people spend money on things is to show off. The other thing is, I think that if you are proud of the decisions that you make and the things that you own, why not show them off? I am very proud of the decision that we made to NOT circ our son, and I don't have a problem talking about it with people. I am also proud of our home, and a lot of the things that we have, and I don't have a problem talking about THAT with people either. I think that when you work hard, and you earn money to buy the things that you want, then good for you!