Hi, I am 20 weeks pregnant and have a strong feeling that this will be a boy, but we are not going to find out until the baby is born. Anyway, last time I was pregnant, we had decided that if it was a boy, the baby would be circ'd. We didn't know any better and believed that that's what most people do and since DH is circ'd that's what we would do as well. Well, after our little girl was born, I found this board, and I must admit that this is my first time visiting this forum, but through all the other forums, I have come to learn that many of my MDC mama friends do not believe that circ'ing is the best way. I have brought up the subject once with DH again, but he feels like we already made that decision, so what's there to talk about. I don't really have any good arguments, so I was hoping you all could give me the scoop on why it's best not to circ my baby boys. I know you are all very passionate about this subject, so please don't get too crazy or upset here. I just want a few simple arguments to convince DH that we should not circ this baby if it is a boy.
My (circed) husband's favorite argument for parents of girls is- "Did you cut any parts of your daughter's genitalia off? No? Then why would you do so to your son?"
an argument he plans to use with his twin brother soon if needed....
For me, the fact that NO medical association in the world stands behind it is impressive. When you take the medical "reasons" away, then it's just cosmetic surgery on an infant, which is ridiculous to most people.
I also like the example of female circ, the arguments are eerily similar for doing both and the idea of FGM turns most American's stomachs (I hope)
when i was pregnant with ds1 i told my husband it was up to him but after a visit to nocirc's website and reading a few articles i told him i would throw my body over the baby's to protect him if anyone came near him with a scalpel. it was that simple. he needed the few facts i had and he was convinced. we have NEVER regretted leaving them intact. i just started browsing this board because i wanted to learn about when retraction happens and how to answer my boy's questions about why some of their friends or dad is circumcised.
my favorite reasons are:
1. it is a COSMETIC procedure (genital mutilation in my opinion); it is not covered by many insurance companies and is considered cosmetic by the AAP.
2. The AAP does not recommend routine circumcision
3. Only half of the boys in this country are circed now and even less worldwide (so they won't be a freak)
4. Little boys don't look like their dads until they are way way too old to care.
5. It is painful and anesthesia is not routinely used on newborns.
6. circumcision does not protect against STDs and is not more hygenic. if the foreskin is left intact the smegma will provide a natural cleansing of the glans .
7. i could not find one GOOD reason to convince me to do it. I have yet to hear one single reason that is not refuted by science or practical wisdom.
thanks for listening.
congrats on your baby.
there are plenty more expert people than me who will respond. i am just a mom with three intact boys, lots of questions, and NO REGRETS
Thanks so far for your answers and arguments. I have a few questions. We recently heard a study that the rate of AIDS is 7 times higher in uncirc'd men. That's one reason DH is for circ'ing. I'm also wondering if anyone has information/knowledge on whether circ'd or non-circ'd men are more sensitive and what's more enjoyable, not that that will convince me one way or the other. Just curious.
A big one for me is they're doing COSMETIC surgery on an organ that isn't even finished developing yet. They have NO IDEA whether the boy in question will grow to be 4" or 9", so why are they doing cosmetic surgery when they have no idea what the result will be??
Besides that, I know when you have a little baby it's hard to imagine that he'll ever grow to be an adult, but one day he will. And when he does he should have all of his own genitals to make a decision about.
there are no studies that prove it has ANY benefits at all, as far as I know.
The one study I saw that said something about STDs and intact men was done in Kenya among only men with multiple sexual partners, go figure....
I think the AIDS rate might factor in Africa (which has a sadly and shockingly high AIDS rate) and low circ rates. i think AIDS is enough of an epidemic there to skew even more balanced studies.
if you clean yourself, bathe regularly and make smart sexual decisions it should not make any difference
i have heard intact me do have more pleasurable experiences because of natural lubrications and lack of scar tissue. few men experience both sides of that coin though....
if the evidence was there for the nenefits of cicumcision it would still be routine (vaccines are and they have their risks, antibiotics and other traditional meds are and they have their risks) the AAP doesn't make a statement against routine circ lightly
In your signature you say your baby is a blessing, that's right, it's a blessing! Why do fathers so stubbornly insist on hurting their newborns? How can mothers hand over their precious little babies, to inflict pain of enormous magnitude, to let doctors rip sensitive skin off their little penises?
Have you looked into how circumcisions are actually performed, do you know what might go wrong? I urge you to see a circumcision video.
I am European and in Europe male infant routine circumcision just simply doesn't exist. I am a mum of 2 boys and it's even strange for me to say that they aren't circumcised, that they both are intact (but of course they are, naturally!). All my male relatives are intact and so is my husband and I have never heard any of them having any problems..
I will tell you that there are more chances of your son having problems because of the circumcision, not mentioning the loss of sexual sensation later in life.
Great site with loads of links to other circ info. Also a very graphic real life circ on an infant, done in Canada. Maybe dh would change his mind if he saw the horrifying mutilation being done for cosmetic resons.
Circumcision is unnecessary
Painful
sexually altering
Never understood why infant males are the only mammals on Earth that need immediate surgery, not to mention on their genitals. It makes NO sense if you really honestly think about it. Why would males have foreskin if they weren't meant to. Why does a infant male need to endure something so painful and permanent for no benifits, and there are none.
Circumcision removes half of a male's erogenous tissue. Half! The foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis.
No medical organization promotes circumcision to prevent AIDS. The evidence just isn't there (a lot of the studies weren't very well controlled for things like religious beliefs and sexual practices). Besides, look at the US - highest circumcision rate AND highest AIDS rate in the developed world.
Ask your dh - would he feel safe sleeping around because he's circed? No? Condoms prevent AIDS and STD transmission, not circ.
For scientific studies, see www.cirp.org - it is all science all the time there! Especially have him read the Taylor studies.
Also, think about taking another tack - you have decided there is no reason to circumcise your baby, and you're not permitting it to be done unless and until he presents you with scientifically documented evidence why it should be done. The burden of proof is his, not yours. Make him do the research.
I am expecting a new baby in Dec and we have decided not to circ. I tried to lecture him with tons of logical and factual info (thanks
to Feebee) but he agree feeling like I was leaving him with no choice and that was that. Now, I would have no question but I wanted him to have conviction and feel apart of that decision. I was on the phone with a friend I had emailed the vidoe clip to from intact and he asked to see it. After seeing that there is NO question that WE will NOT do that to our son/s.
Thanks so much for all the links! I haven't had time to look at them all yet, but I promise I will go through each and every one of them. I don't want you guys to think that my dh is inhumane and unwilling to change on this subject. We just haven't talked about it much and you don't hear much in the real world that supports not circ'ing, if you KWIM. That's why I asked for some good info here, since I really didn't have anything. I was just starting to feel like circ'ing probably wasn't the best idea, but with no real arguments. Thanks. You ladies have helped me out tremendously! Not to mention, saved me money, since I highly doubt our insurance co. would pay for it, as most don't.
Well, here's the story I tell people when they say that the reason their dh wants to circ is so the boy will look like dh:
About a week after ds was born, my SIL (dh's sister) asked me if we had circed ds. I said no. She said, "yeah, our dad's not circed either." Dh is circed. He had NO IDEA that his dad wasn't circed (his dad was born in another country). He had just assumed all these years that his dad was circed. So apparently, not having his penis look like his father's penis didn't really damage their relationship very much!
Originally Posted by my~hearts~light
I tried to lecture him with tons of logical and factual info (thanks
to Feebee) but he agree feeling like I was leaving him with no choice and that was that.
But if it had gone the other way, that would leave you feeling like you had no choice, right? There were 4 people involved in putting a lifetime scar on my genitals, a doctor, two parents and me. There was only one of us who had no say in the matter and that one is the one who has to live with the lifetime effects. There was only one who really had a choice but that choice was stolen by the other three.
Well, one thing that really changed my mind when I was researching the issue was that I began to change the way I look at things.
I used to think circumcising was the "default" and there better be some pretty good reasons if I'm not going to do it. Sounds like this is where your DH is right now (and maybe where you are too).
Then, during my research, something happened. I realized that the "default" should be leaving my son "as is" -- not messing with what nature creates. And if I'm going to change something about nature's design, there better be a pretty good reason to do it.
To clarify, I switched my mindset. Instead of looking for good reasons NOT to do it, I realized that I should be looking for good reasons TO DO it. And if I don't find any, then I shouldn't do it. Period.
If you understand what I mean (it's a little awkward in writing), perhaps you can explain it to your DH and then challenge him to provide reasons TO DO it. He should be the one who has to convince you -- not vice versa.
If you put the burden of justification on him, then I think one of two things will happen:
1) He will do some research and realize that he does NOT actually want to circ.
- OR -
2) He'll come up with some reasons, but you will be able to dispute them all -- since we know that none of them are good enough to warrant the circ.
Lastly, I like to say something like this when people (i.e. societal robots) defend circ "for health reasons":
People may get tonsilitis, but we don't just remove the tonsils of newborns as a preventative measure. People may get fungus infections, but we don't just remove toenails at birth as a preventative measure. etc. etc. etc.
Good luck. Hope this helps.
-Erynn (and Andrew, 5/9/03)
Make sure DH actually knows what circ is.
Most people think that the foreskin is not even really attached to the penis -- that it's just a loose piece of skin that is removed. At least that's what I used to think.
Then I found out the truth -- it IS attached. Maybe your DH doesn't realize this.
Erynn, You're post is exactly how I've started to feel since posting this. Honestly, I was starting to think about not circ'ing, but like you said, it was still my default that circ'ing was the norm. But, after reading all these posts and reading some of the links my mindset has begun to change. Now, I just have to find the right time to bring it all up to DH. I don't think he'll be opposed. It's just that he doesn't know anything different and believes it's the norm. He had never considered using cloth dipes or me using cloth personally until I brought it up and told him the health benefits. He probably thought it was gross before and that nobody used cloth anymore, but now he's a huge advocate of cloth! I just need to educate him a little and I wanted to educate myself first. You ladies have been a tremendous help! I have not watched that video yet, but I read through the prep for the video with the graphic pics and that was enough to turn me off. I didn't realize the forskin was attached and that they have to seperate it first. It looks so painful!
Thinking about the "Looking like Daddy" thing. . . . . . Your husband has written into his genetic code that he had a foreskin and he has passed that very same genetic code on to your son. The son will have a foreskin just like his father had. Cutting that foreskin off makes him look like someone else. . . . . Someone who has apostia which is a genetic defect that causes babies to be born without a foreskin. So, circumcision makes the son look like some man the family doesn't even know instead of looking like the father.
Well said Frank !! I think a lot of people don't consider whose "right" it really is to choose, or not, to be circ'd . I feel the same way. It was no one elses business to make a decision on my behalf. And they screwed up !!!
Quirky - I really like your advice to Aisha to suggest that the onus be on her DH to come up with the evidence to prove his point. Isn't that the way it is supposed to be? The status quo rules until proof is provided that shows a change/modification is required.
Finaly, I have to comment on tha 'Aids' thing. Yes, there was a study done in Kenya - and I can't for the life of me figure out where they get their evidence from. I grew up in Kenya, and I know that most tribes practice circ as a 'comming of age' ritual. I can only think of a couple that don't - so where did they find all their intact men? And, as was pointed out, it is common practice for men to have unprotected sex with multiple partners, which is the real reason for the aids epidemic there. On a really sad and bizarre note - I read some time ago in a newspaper of a program ( I think funded by the Canadian Government ) where "researchers" - and I use the term loosely - were bribing men of the Luo tribe in western Kenya ( who do not circ ) to get circ'd and then come back periodicaly for HIV tests. The whole thing sounds extremely flaky to me.
There are a lot of those "AIDS studies" around. Many of them have serious flaws or a really weak body of evidence and they are not accepted by the world-wide medical community, but they are often blown out of proportion in the media, sometimes repeatedly (check out this thread: http://mothering.com/discussions/sho...d.php?t=142501).
You can read an overview about the problems with the link between AIDS and circumcision as well as many studies at cirp:
It reviewed a lot of studies and came to the following conclusions:
Circumcision in heterosexual men is associated with lower rates of HIV infection. This association is strongest in groups at high-risk of HIV infection. However there are no trials to show whether male circumcision as an intervention reduces HIV infection.
It is not known if the foreskin affects sexual transmission of infection. Circumcision may be an indicator of men affected by other religious or traditional practices which lower the risk of HIV. The review found that men who have already been circumcised have lower rates of HIV infection than uncircumcised men. However, there is no strong evidence of the effects of male circumcision to try to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS. Trials are underway.
The results of these trials will need to be carefully considered before circumcision is implemented as a public health intervention for prevention of sexually transmitted HIV.
But even if there was strong evidence that circumcision decreased the risk of HIV infection x-fold, it would still be no reason for infant circumcision. How many years until he becomes sexually active? Why not let him weigh the evidence and decide then (those trials should be finished and published by then)?
Also, I don't think any of the studies seriously claim that circumcision is as effective as condoms and a responsible sex life. Circumcised men still have to use condoms, just like intact men do. It has also been pointed out that it is in fact dangerous to promote circumcision as "natural condom", because it will distract from the real protection strategies and will lull people into a false sense of security.
Stardust
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Mothering Forum
16.5M posts
285.1K members
Since 1996
A forum community dedicated to all mothers and inclusive family living enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about nurturing, health, behavior, housing, adopting, care, classifieds, and more!