Drs that intentional mess it up - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 48 Old 09-14-2005, 05:11 PM - Thread Starter
 
mommaduck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Land of the Rappin' Buggies
Posts: 1,149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yes, that's what someone mentioned...that it was due to the foreskin being pulled away from the glans. I had no idea that "pulling back" a foreskin caused damage or that it was attached in such a manner in the first place.

Orthodox Mama
mommaduck is offline  
#32 of 48 Old 09-14-2005, 05:19 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 44,408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Another to mommaduck for being willing to research and learn.

It's pretty scary what we can be convinced to do to our babies, isn't it?

-Angela
alegna is offline  
#33 of 48 Old 09-14-2005, 05:19 PM - Thread Starter
 
mommaduck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Land of the Rappin' Buggies
Posts: 1,149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kate~emmasmom
mamaduck, i just wanted to post and let you know that i am impressed with your willingness to have an open mind. i have to admit that i was worried when reading your first post, but was VERY glad to see your subsequent reactions!

keep reading, mama!
You weren't the only one...I received a PM stating the same thing. Get to know me, you'll realize I'm just upfront. I have my views. Some are absolute and some are preferences. I'm used to good discussion and learn best that way. That's why I posted a warning up front...here's my story, bear with me, and please comment graciously (which ppl have ).

Orthodox Mama
mommaduck is offline  
#34 of 48 Old 09-14-2005, 05:25 PM
 
HerthElde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mother Earth
Posts: 3,091
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommaduck
I'm not sure I could put him through that at his age (duh, then why did I put my baby through it at all...cause I was told that it's different and hurts less for a baby than an older person, and that they don't remember it...wait a minute! Was that a lightswitch I just hit?)
I'm pregnant right now, so perhaps that's why this is affecting me, but this part of your post is actually making me cry. Hugs to you mamaduck, good luck on the rest of your journey through these forums - it can be scarey to open your eyes to new information, but although ignorance can be "bliss", it really isn't true happiness, and in the end it's definitely worth it to step out of that comfort zone.
HerthElde is offline  
#35 of 48 Old 09-14-2005, 07:56 PM
 
~Megan~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 15,310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Remember this forum is called The Case Against Circumcision.

Mom of a 7 yr old, 4 yr old, and 1 yr old. Wow. How did that happen?
~Megan~ is offline  
#36 of 48 Old 09-14-2005, 08:53 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm also really impressed by your openness, mommaduck!
And I just want to say that I think what that doctor did was horrible, and in no way representative of most anti-circ folks.
Most of us, if we know someone who's dead set on circing, BEG for the parents to demand the most effective pain relief...which still doesn't work very well usually, anyway, but anything is better than nothing.
It sounds like the doc you had was just a sadist masquerading as a doctor. A true anti-circ doctor wouldn't have performed the procedure at all.
I'm so sorry for what your family went through....that's awful.
mamakay is offline  
#37 of 48 Old 09-14-2005, 08:58 PM
 
Frankly Speaking's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: North Atlanta
Posts: 5,167
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Okay, I know I'm gonna get flamed here, but give me a chance.
Somehow, from your subsequent posts, I think you are here honestly to learn and get your head sorted out about this and I’m going to honestly answer your questions as best I can. If I offend you, please trust me that it is not intentional.


Quote:
I have no problem with ppl who are against circs...fine. I have a problem with drs that are out for their own agenda though...either way!
I believe that may be a false accusation. I’ll give you information and let you be the final arbiter of that issue.


Quote:
The dr that "circ'd" my oldest son (who made us wait till he was six months!) messed up big time. I found out from his associate that it was done on purpose! The dr was against circs and therefore decided (without telling us that he wasn't going to do a normal circ-ie full circ with the ring to prevent pain) to snip him just enough to cause pain (and plenty of infections!)
Actually, it is now known that the old style “tight” circumcisions caused many problems for adult men as has been mentioned by other writers. Many doctors have adopted a looser style of circumcision in order to try to avoid these problems. The medical profession has a long way to go to learn that they can not improve on God’s or Nature’s perfect design and what they have actually done is to trade one set of problems and complications for another. In other words, the problems your son is having may just be a different set of problems he would have had should he have had a tight circumcision. The problem with a tight circumcision is that those problems are lifelong and most likely, the problems your son is having will be outgrown with time. The medical profession still has to learn that there is no right way to do a wrong thing.


Quote:
and did not use ANYTHING to prevent pain.
That is actually the normal standard of care for the medical profession. Less than 25% of babies get anything for the pain and less than 4% get what the AMA considers “adequate” pain relief. That does not make it OK. Any person should not have to suffer unnecessary pain, especially for an elective procedure that is done at the doctor’s leisure. In the emergency room, maybe, but not for a procedure like this. The problem is that doctors and other healthcare professionals are conditioned to pain and it doesn’t affect them they way it should. Because of this conditioning, they are almost unaware of the pain they are causing and blithely ignore the screams. After the procedure, they often don’t even remember the screams of pain.


Quote:
My baby slept for two days, nursing only, screaming from nightmares (ever hear of a 6mos old having nightmares?!),
The sleeping is a normal defense mechanism in response to extreme trauma. I suspect the “nightmares” were actually fear and that when he wakened, he was afraid he would be subjected to the same pain again. It is also possible that when he wakened, he was still in pain and that he was screaming from the post-op pain.


Quote:
and refused his daddy during this time.
That is also to be expected. The child was in fear. It is similar to boys having trouble nursing after the procedure. They are probably afraid of any human interaction at that point and have to have time to begin to trust other people.


Quote:
Their reasoning, other than they didn't want to do it, is that is would be less likely he'd get an STD (my boy will learn to keep his pants on or he's on his own far as I'm concerned) and he will "have a better sexual experience" (my hubby is circ'd and let me tell you, there is NO problem there!). I so wanted to sue this guy!!!
The jury is still out on whether there is any validity to the STD thing and there are arguments on both sides. At any rate, any difference would be insignificant. There is significant evidence that sex for an intact man is substantially better and better for his lover as well.

Since your husband doesn’t have a foreskin, he can not possibly evaluate whether sex could have been better or worse with one. It’s like a color blind man trying to comprehend red or blue. A color blind man once commented on how beautiful my azaleas were. Now, my azaleas are intense and vivid shades of purple, red, magenta, brilliant pink and white. There is no doubt he saw the white ones as they were but the other colors were most likely lost to him and at best, he saw them as pastels. There was no way he saw them in the same manner that I did but yet he thought they were beautiful! That’s the way it is for your husband. He is totally unaware of the sensations his foreskin would have provided and is just as unable to relate to them as you would be able to relate to what it feels like to have a penis. I’ve somewhat “been there and done that.” I have restored my foreskin and I have sensations I could not imagine before and I am missing some of the vital parts to experience the full range of sexual sensations. I have seen explanations by intact men and can understand what they are talking about but the ability to actually imagine them are well beyond my comprehension.

I suspect you can forget about a lawsuit. You were forewarned and decided to ignore the warnings. Few doctors would badly perform a procedure just to punish a parent. I suspect that you got caught up in some office politics by the associate that intimated that this was done on purpose.


Quote:
My 2nd son was done appropriately and had no pain and no ensuing infections. My oldest to this day get infections due to the foreskin still being there. My oldest is considered uncirc'd by his ped.
I doubt there was no pain during the procedure or during the post op recovery period. It may be that you just weren’t there to see it or during the recovery period, you associated crying from urine on the wound with discomfort from a wet diaper. I could be wrong but that’s what I suspect.


Quote:
I'll be honest, I've never seen such aggression against circs as I've seen here, so if you want to add in you input, fine, but be kind...I like hardheaded ppl but not ones that bite your head off...
Actually, this board is pretty mild. Some of the debate boards at other sites put those for and against head to head and it does get really nasty sometimes. In comparison, this is a very mild mannered board. I think I can speak for most members here that we do not intend to be aggressive but this is an issue that can get under your skin and once it does, it kind of takes command. Many members here will confess to being obsessed with this issue because they have had a “light bulb” moment where it all comes together and becomes a cohesive element. After that point, it can become an obsession. Somehow, I can almost see you coming to that point.


Quote:
I am curious about your reasons-you may or may not convince me.
We will not convince you, you will convince yourself. We merely provide the information and you come to your own conclusions. I call it “passing it through the filter of reason and logic.” You take a bit of information and you try to pass it through the filter. If it doesn’t pass through the filter, you toss it as wrongful information. Let me give you an example.

Just recently a mother-to-be wrote me privately with some questions. One, she was concerned about penile cancer, something that many think is a reasonable reason to circumcise a boy, but let’s see if we can force it through the filter of reason and logic.:

The figures most bandied about is that 1 in 110,000 intact men will get penile cancer and 1 in 300,000 circumcised men will get penile cancer. That makes penile cancer one of the most rare of all cancers. But! There are quite a few countries that have essentially a zero rate of circumcision and yet they also have a significantly lower rate of penile cancer than the predominately circumcised US. How is that possible? Well, logically, circumcision has little or nothing to do with it, so that doesn’t pass through the filter of reason and logic.

Let’s look at it another way. Any surgical procedure has risks up to and including death. The risk of death from penile cancer is in the order of more than one in a million and it is always in elderly men. The risk of death from circumcision is on the order of 1 in 7,000 procedures, so it is more risky to circumcise than it is to risk the possibility of death from penile cancer. You also have to consider that penile cancer is simply a skin cancer and if treated promptly, essentially has a mortality rate of zero. You also need to realize that a circumcision death is at the very beginning of life and a preventable penile cancer death is at the very end of the life cycle so that will not pass through the filter of reason and logic, not even if you try to pound it through with a sledge hammer.

There is also a new development in the penile (and cervical) cancer issue. It has long been known that these cancers are caused by the human papillomia virus. (HPV) Just last year, a safe, quick and cheap test for HPV was developed and introduced to the market and just this year, a very safe and effective vaccine was developed and put on the market that is even effective in those who are already infected. Now does it make more sense to use (maybe partially effective) surgery for protection against HPV when the possible outcome is complete amputation of part of all of the penis or even death? Right now, that filter is getting really clogged up and of course, that argument just doesn’t work any longer.

Should a man actually get penile cancer, it is just a skin cancer like people get on their faces and arms and it is treated the same way. They simply remove the cancer as an outpatient procedure in the doctor’s office. There is generally a small scar the size of a pencil eraser that is covered with a Band-Aid for a week or so after the procedure.

It really doesn’t matter what argument is given for circumcision, I have never found one that will pass through the filter of reason and logic and I’ve tried all of them at one time or another.


Quote:
I am a Christian-some are required to still circ, others are not-I do believe there was a physical as well as spiritual reason for everything commanded. In this case, cleanliness...JMHO.
I believe that anyone that reads The New Testament intensely and with comprehension will believe that the circumcision of an infant (or adult as well) is an extreme offense to Jesus. I’m not going to get into it here for obvious reasons but will send you a PM about it.


Quote:
Go for it ladies, I AM curious and willing to listen.
Somehow, I really believe you when you say that. Somehow, I also believe you have an open mind. Good for you!


Quote:
(just remember I grew up with circs being the norm and un-circ'd as considered gross).
Most of us Americans have that hurdle to clear.


Quote:
Also, wanted to add on the ppl losing friends over the issue...I wouldn't give up a friendship over it, but if someone called me a child-abuser for it, yeah, I'd back off also. I also see typical boy circs as a totally separate issue than the drastic long-term issue of girl circs (which I don't consider a circ at all).
Here are a couple of links that helped me realize that the issues are very much the same and they are both from one of the top leaders in the movement against female circumcision:

(Mine were the same links Quirky gave. Thanks for the help, Jane! I actually composed this earlier this afternoon off-line)



If you look at it with a totally unbiased mind, both are the non-consensual removal of genital parts and when those parts are removed, it inevitably changes the sexual experience regardless of the sex. While both sides claim there are sexual, hygiene and health benefits, in actuality, none really exist.

The reason you see a difference in male and female circumcision is because of the blinders our culture has put on us. On the other side of the fence, I’m sure that some that see female circumcision as appropriate and beneficial see male circumcision as an awful thing to do to a man. That’s their cultural blinders in place.

The truth is there isn’t nearly as much difference as the popular media and the movement against female circumcision would have you believe.

While the male penis and the female clitoris have a faint similarity and they both spring from the genital tubercle that is identical in male and female for the first 8 weeks of gestation, they are in fact, far different but with corresponding parts and functions elsewhere. For instance, the female clitoris is the tactile stimulation receptor and the frenulum is the male tactile stimulation stimulator. In female circumcision, the clitoris may or may not be removed but in male circumcision, the frenulum is always disabled so male circumcision is like removing a female’s clitoris. Male circumcision is also like removing the female’s clitoral hood and labia and somewhat the same as removing the mucosal skin lining from the labia so that the entire vaginal cleft is left gaping wide open to dry out. Male circumcision also removes the frenar band or the preputial sphincter which is the equivalent to the female’s vaginal sphincter. Just imagine what sex would be like without that! Circumcised men don’t have to imagine it. It’s their day to day reality. What both male and female circumcision victims are left with is their pressure receptors, the glans in the man and the G-Spot in the female and with these singular receptors, they are able to make do for a satisfying although abbreviated sexual experience. Is that what you would want for your self? Is that really what you want for your sons? I think probably not!


Quote:
All ears for decent, rational comments.
I hope I have given you that and haven’t offended. That was not my intent.



Frank
Frankly Speaking is offline  
#38 of 48 Old 09-14-2005, 09:37 PM
ber
 
ber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: US
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kate~emmasmom
mamaduck, i just wanted to post and let you know that i am impressed with your willingness to have an open mind. i have to admit that i was worried when reading your first post, but was VERY glad to see your subsequent reactions!

keep reading, mama!



And thanks to Frank for that great response - I'll be bookmarking it

M, mom to DS1 (8 yrs), DS2 (5 yrs), and DS3 (2 yrs).

ber is offline  
#39 of 48 Old 09-14-2005, 10:28 PM
 
LoveChild421's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North GA
Posts: 4,593
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Frank, great response and info- as usual

Jen read.gif Mama of 2 precious boys blowkiss.gif (9)  flowersforyou.gif (6)  and still in heartbeat.gif with my Matt hat.gif after 12 years together. 

rainbow1284.gif Domestic Violence Children's Advocate and Counselor hug2.gif

 homebirth.jpg bf.jpg nocirc.gif ribbonjigsaw.gif 

LoveChild421 is offline  
#40 of 48 Old 09-15-2005, 02:33 AM
 
LadyMarmalade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: anywhere but Stepford
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Great post, Frank (as always)!

Good on you, mamaduck, for reading with an open mind! I'm excited that you seem to be turning against circ. It's a really difficult thing for Americans to get over - it's ingrained in your culture and it really seen as 'normal, harmless, safe, the right thing to do' ... whether the reason is based on religious or hygiene grounds. Thankfully there's a lot of information out there which thoroughly debunks every single justification people give for doing this to their sons - just like there's information out there which thoroughly debunks every single justification people give for doing it to their daughters! There are only a few countries in the world where female circumcision is still legal, and hopefully male circumcision will soon follow.
One quote I wanted to address, though:
Quote:
when you are used to this as a normal and expected (let alone the spiritual issues for some ppl) medical procedure, then you don't think of it as mutilation.
I understand where you're coming from, but if you look at it from the opposite viewpoint - of COURSE you don't see it as mutilation because you've been brainwashed into thinking it's normal and expected! American society as a whole has brainwashed through misinformation and poor medical policy. It's really sad If you look up the word 'mutilation' in the dictionary you'll see that circumcision does qualify for the use of this word. As painful as it is to think you've mutilated your child, it's nothing compared to the pain they've already been through.

The only way we'll be able to educate and prevent is through making parents upset and uncomfortable. NOBODY likes to think they've willingly played a part in their child's genital mutilation. Well, there are probably a few out there who don't care - but for the most part if you tell someone that their circumcised son is mutilated they'll react passionately (understandably). It's this kind of response which actually gets them to THINK. If you pussyfoot around and say it nicely they won't look more deeply into what they've done - and there aren't many people who can listen to someone tell them they've mutilated their child and not think about it afterwards. The thinking about it afterwards - once its true nature has been exposed - is the first step to creating a change in thinking.
LadyMarmalade is offline  
#41 of 48 Old 09-15-2005, 06:57 AM - Thread Starter
 
mommaduck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Land of the Rappin' Buggies
Posts: 1,149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks, Frank! I'll have hubby look over the posts later and see what his thoughts are. You've all been really informative and reasonable. That helps. (WOW, didn't think you'd all have me this far along so fast...LOL) I honestly did think that they had "painless" ways of circ-ing. Corrected. Also just didn't think that "flap of skin" did a thing. Corrected again. Thanks, you all have been very patient with me.

Orthodox Mama
mommaduck is offline  
#42 of 48 Old 09-15-2005, 09:03 AM
 
boingo82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: A new-to-us house!!
Posts: 10,125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Mommaduck,
Like a lot of posters here I was really pleasantly surprised that you are interested in learning.
I just wanted to touch on a few things that didn't get mentioned.

You said that your son's infections were never severe enough to warrant a re-circ.
One of the problems in this country, one of the reasons people assume circ is necessary, is that if a boy has a foreskin and gets an infection of any sort, the first thing suggested is to circ.
Now, you're female, and I assume like the rest of us you've had a yeast infection or two, maybe a few UTI's, maybe a bacterial infection. We get infections pretty often, compared to men anyway.
However when WE (and circ'd men) get infections, they treat them with antibiotics, or probiotics, or myriad other non-surgical treatments..
It's late, but you can see what I'm getting at here...an intact boy has an infection and it's the foreskin's fault and he "needs" circumcision. A circ'd boy or a woman gets an infection, and they treat it. It's not that intact boys get more infections, it's that when they do, they're blamed on the foreskin.

As to why pulling back the foreskin prematurely can cause infections..
The foreskin is actually kinda like the vagina, in that it has its normal, healthy bacteria inside, the tissues are delicate. And just like with a girl, any disruption to the natural bacteria (like with harsh soaps) or trauma to the area, can set off infections. It is just one of those things that's healthier left alone.


Sadly, Frank is right that it is actually typical that your son got no pain relief. As appalling as it is, somewhere between 50% and 75% of circumcisions (depending on the hospital) are done without pain relief. At all. Not even a topical cream, which even if administered would be about as effective as Orajel for a root canal. It's sickening. We treat our dogs better than that.
I can provide links to studies if you want proof.


And, ITA with the poster who was questioning the ethics of a doctor who would circ at all. I know you reacted negatively to that comment, but the fact is that doctors are supposed to treat illnesses. Not do whatever the patient (or the patient's parent) requests. If a parent comes in asking to have their child's lips removed because they think it looks better and will make toothbrushing easier, what would you think if the doctor said, "OK - parent's choice!"
Everything we are telling you NOW...they should've told you THEN. Before your sons were circ'd. They are REQUIRED to, by law, and they failed you. We are supposed to have informed consent nowadays, and obviously, we still do not. The AAP clearly states that the benefits of circumcision do not outweigh the risks, and by allowing you to choose circ thinking that it was a healthful choice, these doctors completely failed you, violated informed consent laws. That's malpractice.


Then there is "First, do no harm." By performing unnecessary surgery without informed consent, and without proper pain relief, your doctors definitely broke that rule. By removing useful, normal, healthy tissue without the consent of the patient, they broke that oath. Malpractice.
boingo82 is offline  
#43 of 48 Old 09-15-2005, 09:15 AM - Thread Starter
 
mommaduck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Land of the Rappin' Buggies
Posts: 1,149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thinking back, I also may have (unknowingly) contributed to the infections due to my lack of knowledge about foreskins. I use topical treatments to help the infections (fine), but I also would pull back the foreskin (oops) to do so. (This is how the first ped told me to clean him and to me it just stood to reason that junk would settle under there due to urinating) Would someone PLEASE get info on penile care out to parents? Honestly!

Orthodox Mama
mommaduck is offline  
#44 of 48 Old 09-15-2005, 10:37 AM
 
Frankly Speaking's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: North Atlanta
Posts: 5,167
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
(This is how the first ped told me to clean him and to me it just stood to reason that junk would settle under there due to urinating)
Now, this is where you may have a legitimate lawsuit. I believe there is a lawyer who is active in this issue that wants to get this information out to doctors on a widespread basis to stop this malpractice and the infections and subsequent circumcisions it causes. I don't know if he has found a plaintiff yet or not.



Frank
Frankly Speaking is offline  
#45 of 48 Old 09-15-2005, 10:48 AM - Thread Starter
 
mommaduck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Land of the Rappin' Buggies
Posts: 1,149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm not up to a lawsuit at this late stage. My son is nine, we didn't stay with that ped long and I don't think she is at that clinic anymore (it was a low income clinic and drs go there to get their start). Also, there is no evidence that she said such as it was verbal. But I'm all for ppl to make sure proper info is distributed to doctors.

Orthodox Mama
mommaduck is offline  
#46 of 48 Old 09-15-2005, 02:52 PM
 
polarbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 84
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Whether you are convinced by the arguments presented or not, I commend you for not being blissfully ignorant, and questioning a controversial topic rather than accepting the (U.S.) ‘way it is’. Ignorance comes from not understanding what we see, and not searching for that knowledge. Regardless of your final perspective, you have shown you are not ignorant.

Anyone who has lurked on this or any other circumcision board has come across a parent who’s only reason for circumcising is ‘just because’. Even with solid medical advise, and proven references, the reason is still ‘just because’. Religious aspects aside, I have come to believe that the main reason parents choose to circumcise their boys (and girls elsewhere) is purely emotional, with the medical arguments used to justify the emotional response.

There are several topics that I don’t think have been covered yet, and they may give you and your husband a slightly different perspective, or at least something to discuss. Men and women end up having different perspectives, but equally strong emotional reasons.

FOR MEN
Locker Room Teasing / All His Peers Are: I have found that this argument is mostly used by men. I would imagine that if a study was done on the whole ‘locker room teasing’ concept, that the results may have nothing to do with the locker room. I suspect that “I don’t want my son teased on the locker room” can actually be translated into “I don’t ever want to risk a woman having a negative reaction to my son’s unfamiliar penis, and not wanting to have sex with him.” An entirely hypothetical concept, but one based on the constant (North American) barrage of women / media expressing the “ewww gross!” statements. What man would even risk such a catastrophic reaction for his son? This is no longer even a concern as here (Canada) where the intact guys could gang up on the circumcised guy. And anyways, who would admit looking at another guy’s penis? It is just not an issue.

Look Like Me: I believe that this has more to do with the insecurities of the father in dealing with an unknown sexual issue, than with any (extremely vain) attempt at needing the kids to look like Dad. My parents never talked to me about sex, sexuality or my body, and I can only recall ever seeing my father nude once. they would doubly feel uncomfortable having to explain something to their son that they themselves aren’t equipped with. No foreskin equals no need to deal with it, nor talk about it, not think about it. ‘Looking Like Me’ therefore equals ‘one less uncomfortable sex subject to deal with’. Some my find this a positive, but I believe that the loss versus gain is too high.

Later In Life: This is often brought out as the trump card for a parent. Why would they not do it now when the baby feels no pain (proven wrong), and have to do it later when it is more painful (and the man can adequately control the pain with codeine or whatever). I agree that no parent ever wants to have their child go through a trauma like this, and no man wants their boy to ever have a problem with his penis. The truth is, the majority of intact men will NEVER have a problem with their penis and the vast majority will never need to be circumcised, EVER. According to the Canadian Pediatric Society, about 10 in 1000 (1%) of uncircumcised boys need to be done later in life. The CPS also indicated that about 10 in 1000 (1%) of CIRCUMCISED boys will need to have it done AGAIN due to problems. http://www.caringforkids.cps.ca/babies/Circumcision.htm A specific fact from a world recognized, National organization. Other countries have significantly lower rates (proportional to the acceptability of the foreskin in the culture). Some may ask, “Isn’t it better to have surgery now to remove a healthy part of your body, rather than risk that later in life he is probably - possibly - maybe - perhaps – debatably - doubtfully - not likely – improbably going to have a problem?” If all the ‘My brother’s best friend’s cousin had to have it done when he was 12…’ stories were true, then there would be very few intact men in the world. It just isn’t that common. Again, the means don’t justify the ends.

Loss of Sensitivity / My Penis Works Fine and I Wouldn’t Want It To Be More Senitive:
This response is completely false for several reasons:
- A circumcised man has to admit that there is something wrong or lacking with their precious equipment before they can even think about what it is that is lacking. What man do you know that would admit that they are deficient when it comes to sexual equipment? We have enough trouble getting over feelings of size inferiority without also worrying that there may be something else wrong with their penis. As well, there is nothing that can be done (other than foreskin restoration) to change things ‘so why worry’, so they don't.
- Although I am circumcised and have been since I was an infant, I can tell you as a fact that sensitivity is reduced in a circumcised male. How do I know this? I am loosely circumcised, and my inner foreskin remnant extends about half of the length of my average penis. My understanding is that I am at one end of a spectrum that goes from where most of the inner skin is remaining to virtually no inner skin remaining at all. It is a fact that there is more sensitivity in my remaining foreskin than in my shaft skin. It is similar to lightly stroking the palm of your hand versus the back of the hand. It is a fact that I can climax simply by rubbing the remaining inner foreskin (I have little if any frenulum left) without ever touching the glans. It is a fact that if I were to remove the remaining inner skin, I would have less sensitivity. That is not conjecture, that is not ‘‘I heard of a guy who knows a guy…”, it is not relying on someone else’s ’‘study’‘, it is fact. I wonder what else I am missing from being circumcised, and am thankful that I have more than average skin left. It makes me laugh when someone brings up the sensitivity issue. Removing sensitive tissue = removing sensitivity. As to how the glans reduces in sensitivity though exposure, I cannot factually say. I cannot judge having nothing to compare. Nor can I really say how the loss of my frenulum has affected me, other that to wonder at the reports of how sensitive the frenulums of intact men are reported to be, when mine (what if any is left) really isn't.
- The idea that more sensitivity would be a negative is also based on false ideas. There have been studies that show that circumcised men are both more AND less likely than intact men to experience premature ejaculation. It is often due to psychological conditioning, or physiological triggers/training, with little bearing on circumcision foreskin status.
I have come to the sad realization that although my penis does work fine, but it could have worked better.

My Buddy is Intact and Hates It: Translates into “if I decide to leave my son alone, he may hate it later.” Unfortunately when a father hears this comment from a friend or co-worker, it just reinforces the idea that that their son could potentially have negative things said about their status. Doubly unfortunate is that the Buddy may feel this way due to the myths he himself has just reinforced, continuing the cycle when the Dad circumcises his own son.


WOMEN:
OOOO Gross!: Although health issues are on the list of reasons (North American) women want to circumcise, they will almost invariably cite that they prefer the look of the circumcised penis, and that an intact penis is gross. Teen girls who say this have probably never seen one (but perpetuate what they hear), and a grown women may have never experienced one (but perpetuate what they hear). Again, if you take away the medical argument (not supported by ANY medical association in the World), then what is left is the oooo gross factor. This is not a rational argument, especially if there is no direct experience with the intact penis. North American women have been conditioned to think of it as gross…so it must be…right? So they circumcise the child on the off chance that some girl along the way may think of their penis as gross, (see locker room argument) reinforcing and perpetuating the idea.

Harder to Care For: (See OOOO Gross above). I also have to clean my circumcised penis or it starts to get funky. From conversations I have had, it may take a couple second longer to retract the foreskin and clean, but that’s about it. And that is ONLY after puberty when a parent is really not likely to be bathing the child. Before puberty, body chemistry means that it is just not required (like body odour).


I have made some generalizations that may not apply to you with the intent that you and your husband at least think about these ‘arguments’ and how they are based solely on emotion and not on anything concrete. Arguments that you may not have even thought of as emotional.

Emotions can be as important as facts in some cases, but subjecting an infant to a painful, irreversible, potentially damaging, cosmetic surgery on healthy tissue should not be based on emotions.


Sorry about the super long note. :-)
polarbear is offline  
#47 of 48 Old 09-17-2005, 03:56 AM
 
Sungold17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Harford Co, Maryland
Posts: 270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Also just didn't think that "flap of skin" did a thing.
Isn't it amazing we grow up thinking this? Why wouldn't it have a function? When I read about the function of the foreskin I pretty much knew right then I would not have it cut off! No way was I going to be responsible for a lack of sensation in my son's future sex life .

Out of 5 grand-boys my son is the only intact one. So I can relate to being used to only circ. But I'll tell you that if you leave future boys intact it will look very normal to you and seeing a circ boy will be very weird.

Also, in your first post you mentioned cleanliness. An intact penis is clean and very easy to take care of! It always seems my SIL who has a son the same age as mine is always poking and proding at her son's circ penis. I don't have to do anything. And when Garrett is a teenager all he will have to do is rinse it off like every other part of his body.

Good luck in your research. There is lots of info out there.

BTW, what made you decide to research this after two sons?

-Dawn
Sungold17 is offline  
#48 of 48 Old 09-21-2005, 02:51 PM
 
TigerTail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: I'm finally here!
Posts: 9,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommaduck
Y-ists and messianics required circs. These are forms of Christianity that hold to the OT laws. Most of them are kosher-like, but not actually kosher. Some have a ceremony, most just require a circ/ceremony or not (in the OT is was not always done ceremoniously). Hope that helps. Btw, I'm not one of these...so not an issue.
ftr, we (messianics) do not 'require' anything of the sort. if a particular messianic rabbi (or pastor; it differs with the congregation. some hold to all OT laws, others proclaim the freedom of christ, all are messianic) expresses a personal preference, that is all it is (and there is no foreskin-check on the way in the door).

we do not have a pope. the holy spirit is to be our guide. (and it told me: 'don't injure your babies'. if g-d himself tells me otherwise i'll have a good OT prophet-style debate with him, too. i do not think g-d wants me to do drastic irreversible damage to babies on the basis of voices in my head; the creator of the universe has more conclusive means of stating a preference.)

it does make me shake my head a bit when i hear some of my fellows more gung ho about this than our slew of jewish relatives, some orthodox.

ps i hope this is not considered religious 'debate'; i am merely correcting a false statement. some of the older, more conservative members of our congregation have an objection to those dreadful fagelahs; some of us are accepting & leave the judgement to g-d; but neither is a position that gets one 'officially' excommunicated. that is the great strength of the judaic/christian tradition: a willingness to argue a subject ad infinitum

susan
TigerTail is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off