Circumcisions

[Arizonaffcep]

From the bible, as referred to at a site for "Q&A" on the Jewish religion:

From personal knowledge, and religious training, I am aware the "Bris" is done at the male child's 8th day of life, presumably as that was the indicator the child would survive, and that was when the child would be named.

The mohel, who does the surgery as part of the religious ceremony usually joke that the first thing they get taught when learning the "how to", is not to say "Oops!".

It also supposedly corresponds to a bump in the amount of white blood cells in the newborn.

I don't know about you guys, but several times a month, families bring in their little boys (usually around 2 years and NOT potty trained) to the ED for "swollen penis." As each case evolves, a common thread among them is a lack of education in what/how to clean properly, which leads to irritation and inflammation.

[akflightmedic]

Michael, your link was forbidden to me.

Richard, I am aware of the Jewish/religous history behind it, but again these were tribal people who came up with this, and removing foreskin was a way to show solidarity in private as most do not go around waving their penises in public, but if challenged as to their belief, they could "prove" it immediately. There is no faking a circumcision. If they had decided to tattoo themselves to display their covenant with god, then they would have been more readily identifiable and persecuted even more easily.

Wendy, the same applies to girl's ear piercings. Neither of my daughters had their ears pierced until they decided they wanted it. My first daughter was 9 and the second one was 7, when after a discussion of what it involved, if they were ready and then I took them to get it done. It was all brought up by them and never forced at birth, was never even offered until they asked.

Arizonaff, how does your quip apply to circumcision? Are you stating because they are not circumcised they have infections or are you stating because the parents do not bathe their toddlers properly regardless of fix or no fix that they get an infection?

So why does this procedure continue? Is it a matter of aesthetics? Do mothers not want their little boys looking different, or does the uncleanliness myth permeate?

I have yet to even begin to speak on the sexual aspects of the foreskin removal. An intact foreskin assists later in life with sexual functions as it does aid in lubrication of the glans to aid in penetration. It also protects the head constantly which also increases sensitivity. Yeh, yeh go ahead and tell me...males do not need any more sensitivity in that region. However, we are making decisions that could or could not impact what they may desire for themselves at a later point in life.

Choosing haircuts are irrelevant to this debate. Choosing gender when ambiguous again is not applicable as that is not a common occurrence and when that decision is to be made, it is a difficult one and it is made based on many tests, physician input as to which the child is "more of", and from watching many years of Maury Povich and Montel Williams, it seems more families chose incorrectly.

No, I will not lose sleep over this; yes there are more important things to ponder out there, but I do get extremely curious as to why this procedure continues to exist.

[Arizonaffcep]

Arizonaff, how does your quip apply to circumcision? Are you stating because they are not circumcised they have infections or are you stating because the parents do not bathe their toddlers properly regardless of fix or no fix that they get an infection?

The young boys I refer to had NOT been circumcised. I think the irritation and resultant inflammation have to do with being in a diaper too long and improper/infrequent cleaning. Almost akin to diaper rash.

As far as my opinion on the matter, it doesn't matter either way (although I shudder at the thought of sharp objects down there...). However, families need to be prepared if they are NOT going to get their boys circumcised, then they need to know how to clean under the foreskin appropriately.

[Mateo_1387]

I can remember when my son's circumcision whatnot was ready to come off. I was cleaning him and it just sort of came off in my hands. I FREAKED out with a capital F.

I am confused what you are talking about Ruff. Are you meaning his umbilical cord? When a baby is circumcised, it is cut off, not left to fall off.

I was thinking about this thread and it came to my mind that the less chance of STD's in circumcised men than their counterpart. What a bogus reason to be in support of circumcision. This is how I see it...The STD is not caused by the foreskin, it is caused by having sex with an infected individual. There are more "less invasive" ways to prevent STD's, such as abstinence and condoms, those are much less invasive than circumcision.

I do not know about losing sleep over this subject, but it should be important to everyone, especially men. Approximately 60% of males are circumcised in the US. That is a large number of men. Such a senseless operation....and nobody seems to see it as such....what a shame.

[mrsbull]

I am confused what you are talking about Ruff. Are you meaning his umbilical cord? When a baby is circumcised, it is cut off, not left to fall off.

I believe he is talking about the little "bell" it is a piece of plastic that is tied around the head of the penis that aids in making the "ring" of skin between the head and shaft.

I may be wrong about what he is talking about as my boys are 10 and 7 and both circumcised

Personally as a mother I prefer my boys to be circumcised. Not because of any religious beliefs. I think my decision was about cleanliness. Yes I could have taught them to wash it and how to clean it. However I know that the hospital told us NOT to pull the foreskin back until a certain age. (I do not remember the age) I googled age + foreskin came up with a bunch of sites I do not care to see lol.

My decision also included cosmetic looks. Yea I may be flamed for my decision but I do not care. It was a choice I made and would do it again in a heartbeat.

As far as being a woman and sexually intimate with someone who is circumcised I love it. I do not have to worry about if he cleaned under it and if it is clean enough NOT to harbor bacteria that can give me a uti or another infection "shudders". I know my husband is clean and I take refuge in that. I may be shallow I may be over cautious well that is OK with me.

[DwayneEMTP]

+1000

There's no comparison between circumcision and the mutilation women undergo with a clitorectomy.

-be safe

Though I can see where you're going Mike, there is almost nothing but obvious comparison between the two.

The reasons for doing both are mindless and archaic, they are brutal, and of course both involve the mutilation of reproductive/sexual organs.

Barbara and I chose no with Dylan. Babs was originally for it, as she felt it had religious significance as well as health benefits. After those were each thoroughly debunked in the the context of a Christian living in a society that allows access to regular soap and water she felt differently.

I believe we continue to do it for the same reason we do many things...Blind, often ignorant tradition and/or peer pressure.

The same reason my little brain had to immediately say 'no' until I could find good cause to follow the crowd...I'm not a good follower, and I think Dylan is better for it...

Dwayne

[Michael]

link was forbidden to me

http://www.lyricskeeper.com/fiddler_on_the...tion-lyrics.htm

[akflightmedic]

Ahhhh...I see the humor in your post now. Thanks!

[Kaisu]

I personally said "NO" for my son (17 years ago). I was horrified at the idea of subjecting my helpless little son to that kind of pain. At the time, I was extremely suspicious of the entire medical establishment. Their assurances that infants do not feel pain like we do were belied by the fact that parents were not allowed to watch the procedure. I figured if it wasn't as horrific as I imagined it to be then why wasn't I allowed to watch. The "aftercare" was enough to convince me that the whole thing was barbaric and unnecessary. As far as pleasing future sexual partners, I will have to ask him.

[CheekyEMT]

As a mom to 2 young boys, one being 7 and one being 6 months, it was a discussion we had in depth. More so for little Adam who is 6 months, then for christopher 7 yrs ago. For me it has always been because of hygiene issues....nothing more. Christopher was born in the US and it was discussed and decided prior to his birth. He was circumcised by my OB/GYN the day after he was born. Adam was born here in Ontario 6 months ago and the trend here seems to be not doing it as opposed to doing it. Some provinces , for example, Newfoundland do not circ babies anymore at birth and wait till the baby is 3-5yrs old , leaving many parents to travel out of province to have their babies done if they really want them done. Very close friends of our's were living in Gander Newfoundland when their now 3 yr old son was born. They were adamant that he was going to be circumcised but were unable to have the procedure done because no doctor in Newfoundland would do it. They have since posted to another province and have still been unable to have their son circumcised at the age of 3 and have decided not to pursue it anymore.

Personally, if I was to have another son, my decision would still be to have him circumcised.