Mothering Forum banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,086 Posts
No, there isn't any truth to it, imo. Just another instance of grasping at the latest health scare to justify a barbaric practice.

Kristen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
Unfortunately, people who aren't educated, will and have taken this article to mean that it should be done everywhere. They see the words "MSNBC" and "WHO" and they think that its all they need to prove their point. This was posted on another board I am on, and there was a huge debate about whether it should be done. I posted with resourced info from Mothering about the myths surrounding circ.
It didn't make one bit of difference. Many of the mothers on the board are convinced that I'm an idiot for not circ'ing and that they are saving their sons from major health issues down the road. I tried to explain, but it just didn't work.
All in all, this article really just makes me sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,533 Posts
Even a lot of drs are citing this bogus "study" to justify circ. It has set us back, no doubt. We've had so many posts to refute the material. Now that the search feature is back on people can get to the posts last Nov. when the story first ran in Newsweek. There were some brilliant analyses that debunked the whole methodology of the researchers.
Baybee
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,315 Posts
Well I think if you circumcise a grown man (like in the study) they wouldn't be having sex any time soon after having a major surgery on their penis. Reducing the number of times they have sex, reducing the number of exposures, reducing AIDS. Why don't we just kick grown men in the groin? I think it would produce the same results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,412 Posts
Wasn't there talk of having this in a sticky? I think we really need it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
796 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hippiemommie
Why don't we just kick grown men in the groin? I think it would produce the same results.
Too true! I hate that this "study" is getting so much press. Circ'd or not, wearing a condom is a good idea!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
753 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I didn't realize that this had been going on for a while. It is such hoo ha that circing will prevent any std's. I think it is a dangerous train of thought because some will feel protected because of the circ and be less careful in their sexual practises. Now that I've thought about it I think it is incredibly irresponsible to release a statement like that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Actually, There are studies to suggest both that circumcision helps to reduce STDs and it makes no difference.

Lets take the example of three men. One is circumcised, and doesn't use protection, one is not circumcised and doesn't use protection, and the third uses protection and may be circumcised or not circumcised.

The one who is circumcised has a slightly lower chance of getting an STD than the one who isn't. Why? Well it's elementry really. The Foreskin is very very fragile, and durring love making sessions can get slight tears it in. Hardly even noticable, but these tears allow more fluids to enter the body, and this leads to an increased chance of contracting an STD such as HIV in this case..

However, the man who uses protection doesn't have to worry about whether or not he's circumcised because condoms don't care, and that means he has zero chance of contracting an STD.

So in short. Use a rubber.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,350 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gloval
Actually, There are studies to suggest both that circumcision helps to reduce STDs and it makes no difference.

Lets take the example of three men. One is circumcised, and doesn't use protection, one is not circumcised and doesn't use protection, and the third uses protection and may be circumcised or not circumcised.

The one who is circumcised has a slightly lower chance of getting an STD than the one who isn't. Why? Well it's elementry really. The Foreskin is very very fragile, and durring love making sessions can get slight tears it in. Hardly even noticable, but these tears allow more fluids to enter the body, and this leads to an increased chance of contracting an STD such as HIV in this case..

However, the man who uses protection doesn't have to worry about whether or not he's circumcised because condoms don't care, and that means he has zero chance of contracting an STD.

So in short. Use a rubber.
Not that I would know, but...... some circumcised males having sexual intercourse with females have to thrust so incredibly hard to feel sensation that both sex organs rub together until they're raw creating open abrasions. Where's THAT in the faux-study???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Microsoap
Not that I would know, but...... some circumcised males having sexual intercourse with females have to thrust so incredibly hard to feel sensation that both sex organs rub together until they're raw creating open abrasions. Where's THAT in the faux-study???
That would have to be a very very small percentage, I personally have never experienced that. Please don't use the bill o I do believe the study is flawed, however. Circumcised guys can still get STDs. However, all this worry is stopped when you use protection in the form of a latex, or synthetic latex, condom.

By the way, this isn't the first study to explore this correlation.

Right now, in Africa, they are having a crisis of epic proportions. I believe they are just reaching for a solution anywhere they can find one. For every study that says this i can find a study that says the only real protection comes from using a latex condom.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
Much of the spread over there has to do with the fact that they don't wear condoms, like someone pointed out. Many tribes-men also participate in unsafe and dangerous sexual practices such as rape, so I don't think that circ is the answer. Not to mention that the largest subset of the AIDS/HIV population over there is actually women and children, not men. (at least it was a few years ago when I did some research on it in college). This again is based on the lack of protection and the incidence of rape. Women get it and then pass it on to their children, and many don't know what is going on until it is too late.

Basically, there are many other factors at work here. Circ. is not the only factor determining the spread of STDs and AIDS, it just happens to be the one that was chosen to be highlighted in the study/article.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hippiemommie
Well I think if you circumcise a grown man (like in the study) they wouldn't be having sex any time soon after having a major surgery on their penis. Reducing the number of times they have sex, reducing the number of exposures, reducing AIDS. Why don't we just kick grown men in the groin? I think it would produce the same results.
Kick us hard enough and undoubtedly it would - with the unfortunate side-effect of destroying our sperm count, too! (A depressing scenario, particularly in the light of the fact that annual sperm counts are dropping year by year, it seems.)

No... this is just another example of media hype which the few who promote RIC have latched onto with glee. The WHO quickly followed their intial report with a cautionary statement that they cannot ratify ANY findings until the studies are complete. And already these are floundering, we're told.

There is no sudden rush of panicking wives and mothers clamouring to have their males circumcised in Britain, Scandinavia and Europe. We treated these reports with the cynicism they deserved.

Currently, the only real defence against AIDS is safe sex or celibacy. The intactivist movement in the USA is not even dented; it simply has another 'cure' to debunk.

Christopher
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Islay

The WHO quickly followed their intial report with a cautionary statement that they cannot ratify ANY findings until the studies are complete. And already these are floundering, we're told.

"Amazingly", this isn't getting the same coverage as when the initial information came out.

Thanks for posting. Its nice to hear a male chime in on such heavy topics!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gloval
The Foreskin is very very fragile, and durring love making sessions can get slight tears it in. Hardly even noticable, but these tears allow more fluids to enter the body, and this leads to an increased chance of contracting an STD such as HIV in this case.
Gloval, looking at your profile and the search results of your Mothering posts, I cannot determine if you're male or female! However, with respect I must take issue with you over your concept of the foreskin's frailty.

In fact, the foreskin is remarkably tough. Wonderfully sensitive but tough as old boots! If tears ever occur then it is either the result of very rough sex or some rare condition such as true or acquired phimosis.

Welcome to this board, by the way!


Christopher
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,757 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Islay
Kick us hard enough and undoubtedly it would - with the unfortunate side-effect of destroying our sperm count, too! (A depressing scenario, perticularly in the light of the fact that annual sperm counts are dropping year by year, it seems.)
Sperm counts are dropping? Why? If a grown man gets mumps and loses one testicle he could still populate the world with the one that's left...

Back on topic - WE NEED THAT STICKY!!!!!! (yes, I did YELL that!)

love and peace.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
753 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
"Currently, the only real defence against AIDS is safe sex or celibacy. The intactivist movement in the USA is not even dented; it simply has another 'cure' to debunk."

I agree with your post I just wanted to add monogamy to the list. I guess it could be put under safe sex but I equate safe sex with condoms.

And I also believe the epidemic in Africa has alot to do with rape. So the problem of rape/violence against women is being sidestepped with this crazy theory.

I just noticed the link above. I thought it was interesting they didn't include religion or sexual practises in the studies so far. In my particular religion circ is almost 100% (not for doctrinal reasons though) However our religion also promotes heavily saving for marriage and monogamy. So in our particular area there is low hiv/aids rates but I would dare to say it has NOTHING to do with circ and more due to religious/moral practises.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by trmpetplaya
Sperm counts are dropping? Why? If a grown man gets mumps and loses one testicle he could still populate the world with the one that's left...
Given he has enough virile sperm - which was the point I was making.

As to why, I've no idea; but apparently it's the case. I could continue but it's barely on-topic, so best leave it there.

Christopher
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Anakna4
"Currently, the only real defence against AIDS is safe sex or celibacy. The intactivist movement in the USA is not even dented; it simply has another 'cure' to debunk."

I agree with your post I just wanted to add monogamy to the list. I guess it could be put under safe sex but I equate safe sex with condoms.

And I also believe the epidemic in Africa has alot to do with rape. So the problem of rape/violence against women is being sidestepped with this crazy theory.

I just noticed the link above. I thought it was interesting they didn't include religion or sexual practises in the studies so far. In my particular religion circ is almost 100% (not for doctrinal reasons though) However our religion also promotes heavily saving for marriage and monogamy. So in our particular area there is low hiv/aids rates but I would dare to say it has NOTHING to do with circ and more due to religious/moral practises.
Totally agree with the above. And monogamy offers the additional benefit of offering freedom from condoms, if preferred.

Christopher
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top