Male Circumcision.

[Prideth]

We are all mature adults here (I hope ), so think this subject can be discussed in a mature adult fashion .

Is routine male circumcision mutilation?

This practice has not been recommended by medical professionals as a routing procedure in most western countries for over 20 years now, and in all western nations, except the US, the numbers of baby boys being subjected to it is under 20%. In some nations its less than 10%. Now, mostly for debunked heath reasons, it is on an upswing again. The biggest myth is that it protects against the HIV virus.

Thing is though, this procedure, when done for non medical reasons, subjects a baby to intense pain because it is usually done without anasthetic and does carry risks, the most extreme of which is death. It is also done to a helpless infant without his consent. While I don't want to compare male circumcision to the female mutilation because they are two different things, it is still a non-necessary mutilation that is not reversable.

In my opinion this operation should be banned for minors for any reasons other than medical necessity and, grugingly, religion, though I'd like to see it stamped out there as well. If the boy grows up and decides for himself he wants it done, no problems, but doing this to an innocent baby is nothing more than child abuse in my opinion.

[mistergreen77]

If you think it should be against the law it should be against the law regardless of religion.

But really, could you imagine a lawsuit against parents for circumcision? After all, it is supposed to diminish sensitivity for the recipient. So our young victim would have grounds for pain and suffering and loss as a result of the procedure? This is ridiculous. It is political correctness gone mad. Show me any study that shows circumcised men are psychologically effected or have mental health problems as a result of having had the procedure? It is a cultural thing like eating your eggs from the round or the pointy end. Do you really want to make laws over this?

[Chroelle]

Let us not forget that some people get it done because of true medical reasons. I know that a great deal of the Danish boys who gets circumsized does so because of an annoying anomali. The skin grows together in a string over the head of the penis (haha he said penis) and thus making peeing difficult. Some also experience that the foreskin is too thight and thus gives pain during erection (haha he said erection) or generally during the day depending on how tight the penis (haha he said...oh I did that one already...) is "packed".
Some boys get it due to religious beliefs and cultural traditions but really it is not that many in total.
In my near group of friends (Counting about 15-20 people), there are two people who is circumsized and one is jew and the other had it done for medical reasons.
I think the mutilation as you refer to it, is not really that bad. Most are done in full sedation. At the same time you might want to think about what other procedures are done to kids... Kids gets their ears sown in if the are pointing out from the head. They get operated for...that thing where you have an opening crack between your nose and your upperlip. They get treated for all kinds of anomalies, and I don't consider this to be mutilation. If your culture says that circumsizion is a must, then I don't think it is that big of an issue. IF done without sedation it is cruelty, but in Europe I don't think that takes place anywhere. I don't think that I can say this for the rest of the world.
Also you say that it is without the childs consent, but at that age a child does not have a reasonable consent to give. That is why it needs guardians. I think they make the best decision they can and out of love to their child. So I see no problem with it.

[Scythe]

When male circumcision is done for medical reasons, I see no problem. Otherwise, it's nothing but cosmetic surgery, whether for reasons of religion or what not. I firmly believe that shouldn't be done to anybody who hasn't given their legal consent, hence adults. You can't very well undo the operation.

An American friend of mine, upon seeing an uncircumcised male member for the first time, remarked that while it looked "strange" (because she was used to something else), there really was no functional difference, and actually began questioning why it was so widespread in the U.S.

[Parvini]

We are all mature adults here (I hope ), so think this subject can be discussed in a mature adult fashion .

**Snigger**

I can't really offer anything intellegent to this topic... but I've always wondered how circumcised guys "aim"...lol... no, seriously

*Takes cover before being pelted with root vegetables*

[Chroelle]

Why would they have problems aiming?
I am drawinga blank here.

[Parvini]

Well... without going into too much detail, I imagine it... um... spraying everywhere. Sorry all, for bringing this aspect of it up...

[Chroelle]

Er.... Sorry to say Parvini, but I don't think that is a problem. I can't really see what an inch of extra foreskin that can actually get in the way does for your aiming that a "bare head" does not...
Could you explain your thoughts more thouroughly. Nothing wrong with anatomy talks here I think.

[Prideth]

Considering 85% of the worlds men are intact, I hardly think aim is a problem. From my experience, having had relationships with men on both sides of the coin, it is how the male himself aims and how much alcohol he's had to drink, not whether he is circumcised or not, that may or may not result in a puddle on the toilet floor. An intact foreskin is retractable .

I found this on the web while researching the myths of circumcision. It is a pictorial of an operation and shows what the baby goes through.

Click Here.

Someone above compared this to children having operations like getting ears pinned back ect. I don't feel that is the same thing. In ops like that, the kids are having something not quite normal fixed, in circumcision they are haveing something normal permanently mutilated. There is a difference, athough unless the defect is very obvious, definetly not normal and will result in a childhood of torture for the kid, I'm against plastic surgery for children as well. Have heard of girls having nose jobs ect at the age of 4 or 5 for the kiddie beauty pagent circuit in the US. Utter madness.

[Parvini]

An intact foreskin is retractable .

To clear up my question here... ahem... when I try to aim with the forskin "retracted", it tends to go everywhere as it is akin to squeezing a hose - the wee squirts out much faster and so it is more difficult to aim. My assumption is that those who've been circumcised are constantly in this state of.. um... squeezed hose.

[Scythe]

Wow. I certainly don't have that problem, quite the contrary. My aim improves considerably in "retracted mode." I guess you're one of those whose aim is just off. Unless of course you fall under Prideth's alcohol theory.

[Parvini]

Just in case you're still interested, I found a Great Site on this subject earlier. Ladies, look away now!

[Pitkin]

Just what the blaze are you posting in an all-family website, Parvini-san? T_T;

I'm sorry for posting nothing new, but I'm of the opinion that the circumcision shouldn't have any effect on the ahem... restroom issues. Being circumsized might have some impact on... well, other male member-related matters, though; something to do with friction, perhaps.

Forget it, I'm not mature and daring enough to talk about such things...

[Zandrav Ibistenn]

The biggest myth is that it protects against the HIV virus.

It's too early to dismiss that. Several studies seem to have indicated that male circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection. However a Cochrane review (an institution dedicated to validating medical statistics) have found those to be inconclusive for statistical reasons.
More studies pertaining this matter are scheduled for 2007 as far as I'm informed.

However, I fail to see why such findings are so interesting since the risk of infection is only reduced (not eliminated) - and I seriously hope that no one would suggest circumcision as an preventive measure, since I can imagine that that would disrupt the notion of safe sex (which is so frustratingly difficult to pound into people's brains anyway) as the way to go when fighting HIV/AIDS.

As for the procedure itself.
While I would characterize it as mostly harmless, I think it's important to consider whose interests are being served.
Does it benefit the child? No. The parents? Yes - it's what their culture demands from them, so the easiest thing is to comply.
I don't feel this is how things should be: The interest of the baby boy takes priority - comfort him when he cries, buy him a rattle, sing him a song - but don't have unnecessary surgery performed upon him.

[Prideth]

Parvini, as mod of this forum I have to check all links posted, and aren't happy that I was just swindled. Consider yourself in biiiigggg trouble, and the subject of future revenge. You won't know when, where or how, it will happen when you least expect it, but I will get even .

The HIV/AIDS "protection" by circumcision is one of the things being peddled to parents, especially in the US, by doctors as a reason to have their boys cut. Of course that is mostly being done by doctors who just want to earn some extra money, and they know that scaring parents who don't know any better into allowing this, in most cases, un-necessary operation, because those parents want what is best for their children is a good way to do that.

[mistergreen77]

Again I ask, what difference does it make if you eat you eggs from the round or the pointy end? If you have some evidence the suggests the procedure may cause adverse outcomes for the development of the male then please supply this for the debate. Otherwise, what difference does it make if someone has a foreskin or not? Although of course, I would object to parents being given misinformation about this if what you say about doctors in the US is true.

Off the topic, when my brother was born with eyelids the doctor offered to circumsise him and reuse the skin to give him eyelids. My mother was horrified and exclaimed "No! He will be cockeyed!" but the doctor remarked "Yes, but think what foresight he will have."