Circumcision as a criminal act
- Thread starter GipsyQueen
- Start date
This is exactly why so many of us "keep fighting". Too often we have had people unaware or worse, suffering from guilt and remorse from doing it. Too many times I have heard "if only someone wouldve told me" etc. So, some links that may help if you are interested....
http://www.drmomma.org/
http://www.savingsons.org/
http://www.circumstitions.com/
http://www.drmomma.org/
http://www.savingsons.org/
http://www.circumstitions.com/
Actually, the rate in 2011 dropped below 30%! Still quite a few, but at least it's no longer the majority of babies. It's great that doctors are no longer recommending it. My OBGYN is strongly against circumcision, and gave me tons of information & reading to do about it, even though I would never consider it.
I feel like the risks just don't outweigh the benefits. To hear the word "easier" thrown around so much is sad... so because an optional medical procedure makes caring for your baby a little bit easier (which is debatable), it's worth the risk of serious complications or lifelong sexual struggles? My little brother is intact, and I changed hundreds of his diapers when I was 14 years old. I never had a issue with it, I never had to do anything extravagant or extra, and he never had a problem with his penis. I was 14 & cared for him daily! I feel like the risks of getting a baby circumcised truly are underestimated. Besides the obvious risks of loss of sexual sensation, ED (which is linked to circumcision), cutting off the tip of the penis, needing surgical corrections, etc. Everyone knows that sex is THE WORLD to men, and I really couldn't deal with myself if my choice to circumcise affected my child's for life.
According to a medical journal, there are more than 100 infant deaths every year in the US, as a result of circumcision. That's 100 babies that would be alive if their parents didn't choose to circumcise them! 1 out every 77 infant deaths is because of circumcision.
"To put this in perspective, about 44 neonatal boys die each year from suffocation, and 8 from auto accidents. About 115 neonatal boys die annually from SIDS, nearly the same as from circumcision."
I can't fathom comparing an elective, unnecessary, cosmetic surgery to putting a baby in a car seat and driving somewhere or vaccinating a baby. But honestly, if my human sexuality teacher had not been avid about educating us on the topic and spent hours discussing it, I wouldn't have any opinion at all on the subject. I'd let my boyfriend decide... and being that he's circ'ed, he wanted his baby to be circ'ed too. It only took like 30 minutes of discussing it with him for him to change his mind! Common sense is a great thing. I realize that circumcision was pushed on parents in this country throughout the 20th century, not circumcising was considered very weird. No one should be ashamed that they chose to circumcise their sons but that doesn't mean you can't educate yourself and realize that it's not necessary. Performing a surgery that could kill your child to MAYBE prevent a possible UTI in their future and MAYBE save a few seconds per diaper change? It doesn't really make sense.
I feel like the risks just don't outweigh the benefits. To hear the word "easier" thrown around so much is sad... so because an optional medical procedure makes caring for your baby a little bit easier (which is debatable), it's worth the risk of serious complications or lifelong sexual struggles? My little brother is intact, and I changed hundreds of his diapers when I was 14 years old. I never had a issue with it, I never had to do anything extravagant or extra, and he never had a problem with his penis. I was 14 & cared for him daily! I feel like the risks of getting a baby circumcised truly are underestimated. Besides the obvious risks of loss of sexual sensation, ED (which is linked to circumcision), cutting off the tip of the penis, needing surgical corrections, etc. Everyone knows that sex is THE WORLD to men, and I really couldn't deal with myself if my choice to circumcise affected my child's for life.
According to a medical journal, there are more than 100 infant deaths every year in the US, as a result of circumcision. That's 100 babies that would be alive if their parents didn't choose to circumcise them! 1 out every 77 infant deaths is because of circumcision.
"To put this in perspective, about 44 neonatal boys die each year from suffocation, and 8 from auto accidents. About 115 neonatal boys die annually from SIDS, nearly the same as from circumcision."
I can't fathom comparing an elective, unnecessary, cosmetic surgery to putting a baby in a car seat and driving somewhere or vaccinating a baby. But honestly, if my human sexuality teacher had not been avid about educating us on the topic and spent hours discussing it, I wouldn't have any opinion at all on the subject. I'd let my boyfriend decide... and being that he's circ'ed, he wanted his baby to be circ'ed too. It only took like 30 minutes of discussing it with him for him to change his mind! Common sense is a great thing. I realize that circumcision was pushed on parents in this country throughout the 20th century, not circumcising was considered very weird. No one should be ashamed that they chose to circumcise their sons but that doesn't mean you can't educate yourself and realize that it's not necessary. Performing a surgery that could kill your child to MAYBE prevent a possible UTI in their future and MAYBE save a few seconds per diaper change? It doesn't really make sense.
I'd hardly say this is an argument... it's a discussion, and even if one person learns something that they didn't know before, then I'd say it's still relevant.
My decision to not circ has been in place for years, but I've learned a lot of things I didn't know because of this thread! Obviously I'm not the only one
My decision to not circ has been in place for years, but I've learned a lot of things I didn't know because of this thread! Obviously I'm not the only one
S
The only part I really had a problem with (I love their shows for the most part), is that they pushed foreskin restoration at the end...which is fine, if a man is already circumcised, because that's really all he can do about it. But what wasn't mentioned is that foreskin restoration CAN NOT grow back any of the structures that were removed during circumcision, like the frenulum and frenar band, or any of the nerve endings associated with those structures. The inner foreskin is not skin, but mucous membrane (like the inside of your lip), which will also never grow back during restoration.
I wanted to mention those things because I've seen a lot of people use the justification, "if he doesn't like being circumcised as an adult, he can just have it restored."
I wanted to mention those things because I've seen a lot of people use the justification, "if he doesn't like being circumcised as an adult, he can just have it restored."
S
With soap and water.
The foreskin of a baby adheres to the glans, it's nature's way of preventing foreign bodies, urine and feces, bacteria, etc, from building up under a baby's foreskin (which is why it makes no sense for parents to circumcise "because it's easier to keep clean when they're babies"). A lot of parents unfortunately don't know how foreskin works, and forcibly retract it before it naturally loses the adhesion.
The foreskin of a baby adheres to the glans, it's nature's way of preventing foreign bodies, urine and feces, bacteria, etc, from building up under a baby's foreskin (which is why it makes no sense for parents to circumcise "because it's easier to keep clean when they're babies"). A lot of parents unfortunately don't know how foreskin works, and forcibly retract it before it naturally loses the adhesion.
Last edited by a moderator:
Noo... I've never met a man with a UTI. It's very uncommon. Very uncommon indeed.
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/menshealth/facts/urinaryinfection.htm
No mention of foreskins I'd see it as a valid argument for carrying out circumcisions if it actually had a factual basis, but it reeeeeeally doesn't.
It is tradition, plain and simple. Especially when you consider the chance of getting a UTI in early life for boys is like... 1%.
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/menshealth/facts/urinaryinfection.htm
No mention of foreskins
I'd see it as a valid argument for carrying out circumcisions if it actually had a factual basis, but it reeeeeeally doesn't. It is tradition, plain and simple. Especially when you consider the chance of getting a UTI in early life for boys is like... 1%.
