Originally Posted by Mana Mamma
I have researched the pros and cons of male circumsicion and there ARE pros and cons. My difficulty is finding if the "pros" are true or if the information is biased. This is also my difficulty with the "cons". Most of the information I receive is highly emotionally charged. All the circumcised (as babies) men I have discussed this with are fine with having had it done...especially with the cleaning issue. It's quite possible they don't know what their missing?....but then again, there is no report of not having enough pleasure. The men I know who have had it done as adults are supportive of having it done as babies. Two men is not enough input for me for such a intense procedure....
With regard to female circumsicion, I cannot find any pros for female circumcision and it appears the practice has evolved simply to control women. I've never heard of an adult woman who, for medical reasons, had to get the procedure done.....has anyone?
Thank you to the person who mentioned that you cannot get the foreskin back. That's a good point and is the simple kind of dialog I am looking for.
Every single medical organization in the world with a position statement on routine infant circumcision states that the potential (i.e. unproven) benefits do not outweigh the known risks of circumcision. Therefore none of them recommends it for health or hygiene.http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/
This is from medical organizations such as the AAP and its equivalents in other English-speaking countries such as the UK and Australia (in other words, places where circumcision took root for historical reasons in the 19th century).
You should really do some research on the history of non-ritual/non-religious male circumcision. It was begun in the 19th century PRECISELY to control male sexuality and diminish sexual pleasure. During the Victorian era, it was thought that masturbation led to physical and moral disease, and therefore that circumcision -- reducing sensation in the penis and eliminating the gliding action of the foreskin that allows for easy and pleasurable masturbation -- would promote so-called moral hygiene.
These are the exact same reasons that cultures such as those in many parts of Africa and Asia give for circumcising girls -- that they'll be cleaner, less prone to disease, and morally more pure if parts of their genitals are removed. Even in this country, up until the 1970s, circumcision for girls was covered by many health insurance plans, and girls could be circumcised if their clitoris was "too prominent" or if they masturbated "too much."
Ever since the 19th century, circumcision has been the cure for the "disease du jour." It has been claimed -- in medical journals -- that circumcision cures or prevents epilepsy, cerebral palsy, tuberculosis, syphilis, and more -- and the latest disease du jour is HIV.http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/
Read this slide show of quotations from doctors and medical journals:http://www.icgi.org/information/medicalization/
And take a look at the history of female circumcision in the US:http://www.historyofcircumcision.net...id=76&Itemid=6
and the reasons that women still insist on circumcising their daughters in other cultures:http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.html
Originally Posted by Mamma
I'm not making any arguments FOR circumsicion.....I'm looking for info beyond "my personal opinion". Quite frankly, I do not think the issue (at least for me) is about appearances. I'm sure it is for others but I'm only concerned with my son at this point and not other people's kids.
I've not found ANY info that supports the statement that women get circumcised often due to recurrent infections. I'm not sure where you found that.
I came to this forum because the data behind "Circumsicion lowers risk of HIV" is clearly not sound and the idea is rediculous. I'm looking for data on bacterial and yeast type of infections and some real life experience like....can you smell your boys due to lack of care or do they take the cleaning seriously? I'm sure there is a variety of experiences here.
....And when I feel funky, like when an infection might be brewing down there ...I do increase the airflow by not wearing any underwear. Wearing it will bring it on in those times.
My intact son is 6 and has never smelled funky or gross. OTOH, my circumcised husband sure does after a workout or if he's been outside doing yard work and gets all hot and sweaty. That's what a shower is for. It's not the foreskin that promotes bad smells, it's sweat and bacteria combined.
In terms of genital smells, my dds smell way funkier than my son ever does -- my middle dd has very concentrated urine and just gets smelly. Again, regular baths take care of it.
Hygiene for the intact male is ridiculously easy -- when they're babies, never retract the foreskin and wipe like a finger. As they get old enough to retract themselves, teach them to retract in the bath and swish in clean water, then replace the foreskin. That's it. I've seen smegma on my dds -- but never, not once, on my son. Diaper changes were easier on him too -- no folds for poop to get in.
Really, hygiene is a non-issue. Would you ever in a million years consider cutting off your own labia to get rid of the folds and prevent yeast infections? No. So why on earth would you consider cutting your son's genitals to prevent some hypothetical infection? IF he gets one, treat it with the appropriate drugs. But the odds are good he never will.
You also need to learn more about the function of the foreskin and why it's not OK to cut it off. This is a good place to start, and it's based on scientific papers published in the British Journal of Urology:http://research.cirp.org
And research demonstrating that circumcised men have much less sensitivity than intact men, again published in the British Journal of Urology:http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/