Why is male infant circumcision promoted while female circumcision is a crime?

[TheClimax]

anteater in training(foreskin restoration)

also working on my lawsuit(srs)

lawsuit?

[SeanP35]

Male circumcision is for cleanliness and health purposes while female circumcision is to prevent the woman from enjoying sex. Not quite the same thing.

They are the exact same thing. The whole "herp derp it's fer ur health" is a load of ****. Both have religious origins, and both were originally performed to prevent pleasure during sex.

How the hell can you actually try to argue that cutting off the skin that is there to protect the head is better for your health?

I can understand other countries thinking its wierd, but in North America, its kinda the norm, just sayin

No it's not.

[cphustla]

I'm cool with all that. I've never had performance issues due to circumcision and I have a lower lifetime risk of STDs, urinary tract infections, phimosis, paraphimosis, genital ulcers, and penile cancer

show me where I said uncut and cut feel the same. I don't doubt that uncut preserves more nerve endings. However, I think the argument from uncircumcised guys that the difference in pleasure from sex far outweigh the health benefits of circumcision is blown out of proportion

the only places in the world with the most cut dicks is africa and the USA... both have the highest STD rates in the world...



srsly bro..... think a little just takes some common sense.

[NeoSeminole]

Health benefits are shenanigans. Ok? Shenanigans.

http://motheringchoices.blogspot.com...event-uti.html
http://www.norm-uk.org/circumcision_hiv.html

For every study that says circumcision prevents this and prevents that, there is another study that disagrees with it. And studies that say it does prevent certain infections, produce minute results in the difference between in uncut and cut.

brah, lol, come talk when you find more credible sources. I clicked on the links you posted and each study was done by a single person who collected data from older studies. One of them used sources that aren't even available anymore (I entered the URL and it said "could not find page")

[NeoSeminole]

They are the exact same thing. The whole "herp derp it's fer ur health" is a load of ****. Both have religious origins, and both were originally performed to prevent pleasure during sex.

How the hell can you actually try to argue that cutting off the skin that is there to protect the head is better for your health?

in case you missed it..

According to a report in 2008 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

"Lack of male circumcision has also been associated with sexually transmitted genital ulcer disease and chlamydia, infant urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and cervical cancer in female partners of uncircumcised men."

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/fac...rcumcision.htm

The results of a 25-year study on circumcision were published in 2006

"Circumcised males are less likely than their uncircumcised peers to acquire a sexually transmitted infection, the findings of a 25-year study suggest.

According to the report in the November issue of Pediatrics, circumcision may reduce the risk of acquiring and spreading such infections by up to 50 percent, which suggests "substantial benefits" for routine neonatal circumcision."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15593753...h-mens_health/

[Sherloc]

Because they won't feel anything. So, sex is an obligation rather than a pleasurable experience.

"Lightfoot-Klein (1989) studied circumcised and infibulated females in Sudan, stating, "Contrary to expectations, nearly 90% of all women interviewed said that they experienced orgasm (climax) or had at various periods of their marriage experienced it. Frequency ranged from always to rarely." Lightfoot-Klein stated that the quality of orgasm varied from intense and prolonged, to weak or difficult to achieve.[58]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_...e_circumcision

[Plainandtall]

Malakai- I'm glad that you understand that the crux of the issue is about the consent... not some rivalry between two "clubs" over who has the best penis. While I'm sad to hear about the medical issue you had as a kid, you seem at peace with what happened and do enjoy your sex life. You are right on to not spoil things to be overly concerned about it.

Neoseminole- You seem really sure that FGM has no medical "benefit"... would it be ethical for us to look for some for the next thousand years?

More women get cancer of the labia than men get cancer of the penis.
More women get UTIs than men do... maybe that's an angle to investigate...
Most American hetero males who get a STD- got it from an uncircumcised women.

Are uncircumcised women more vulnerable to getting and passing STD's? - let's find out! We won't cut women for sexual control- we'll do it for hygiene and aesthetics. (it's not sexually controlling for a culture to view the normal female body as animalistic and alien and shape their daughters to fit some dysmorphic idea of what female should look like... is it?)

Circumcision cases a lot of problems here in the USA. More boys who are circumcised as infants will be circumcised a second time than intact boys ever need to be circumcised a first time.

There is a common problem called "meatal stenosis" that affects about 9% of circumcised boys because they were circumcised. This statistic is not reflected in the complication rate cited by the AAP in their circumcision policy statement.
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1016016-overview

Interestingly, the AAP lists 20 complications, and one of them is post circumcision phimosis. "Huh?" You may say. Yes, oddly enough, many circumcised boys get phimosis caused by a constricting circumcision scar in front of their glans... "How the heck does the scar get in front of the glans if they are circumcised?" Well... babies can be very chubby, and their tiny baby penis gets pulled into their fat pad and their shaft skin doubles over and covers the glans. Lots of parents complain that their kid's circumcision "didn't take" and they get them circumcised again. What's horrible about this is because when the kid does grow up- his penis grows, his pubic fat pad shrinks and he has less skin than the length of his penis shaft.

This link goes straight to NSFW graphic medical pictures of this situation on a Dr's website:
http://www.rogerknapp.com/medical/circ_incomplete.htm

I had a boyfriend who had pubic hair right up to his circumcision scar. His penis had to borrow pubic skin to cover his erections. His mom and his circumciser surely never saw him with an erection after puberty. I rage inside whenever I hear a mom brag about how nice her son's circumcision turned out and I think of him. If your kid doesn't have an adult sized erection and pubic hair yet- don't act like you know that what you did to him was wonderful.

Lots of circumcised kids get adhesions that cause them pain and infections and the situation is certainly not maintenance free like they seem to present it before surgery- once again- the irony that the circumcision was intended "to avoid problems" is lost on millions. This mom of twin boys tells her story and finishes with a sexist line toward all men and her own innocent sons that falls like a kick to the nuts: (imagine if the writer was male speaking of females and see how it rings)
http://www.louisvillemojo.com/blogs/...__Two_of_them_

I don't believe that there is a right way to circumcise a non-consenting person. I don't think information about "what could go wrong" is even relevant. (google: Necrotizing fasciitis after Plastibell circumcision) I believe that there is an inherent value in the default form of the human body (and human rights) that no amount of risk reduction can ever ethically justify cutting without direct medical need.

[ditsy911]

brah, lol, come talk when you find more credible sources. I clicked on the links you posted and each study was done by a single person who collected data from older studies. One of them used sources that aren't even available anymore (I entered the URL and it said "could not find page")

Brosef, if infections were such a problem, then how come they're not? How come there isn't a dick infection epidemic around the world? How come no uncut guy in the misc has ever talked about having an infection?

Do explain.

[FIREnICE]

How can I be insecure when I'm cut saying uncut is better? Circumcision is just plain ignorance, on all levels.

i thought you were skinned saying skinned is better and putting down anteaters. i never read any other posts besides op.

[Malakaibeats]

Malakai- I'm glad that you understand that the crux of the issue is about the consent... not some rivalry between two "clubs" over who has the best penis. While I'm sad to hear about the medical issue you had as a kid, you seem at peace with what happened and do enjoy your sex life. You are right on to not spoil things to be overly concerned about it.

Yeah, sure, I get that completely, the whole 'clubs' thing is ridiculous. My 'medical issue' was really a non-issue, in that it was inevitable and I remember nothing. It's not like I'm left with the shell of what was once a glorious penis, I'm just cut now, that's all. I live with it like I live with the fact that my eyes are brown, it's just me, I honestly don't feel like the victim of a horrible crime or anything.

[Plainandtall]

Malakai- While if feel that I have already exceeded my misc wordcount allotment for the day... I'd like to ask you some things- just because your perspective as an Italian is probably different than an American.

In the USA, your story would be used by every friend of friend, mother's uncle's cousin twice removed, co-worker and medical professional who worked in any office where your parents took you for help- as a tale of woe to warn parents why they should circumcise their baby to avoid the chance that what happened to you would happen to their baby. In fact, I hate to tell you this, there are probably miscers right now thinking, "see, I knew it! gotta circumcise the baby!" What do you think about that and what do people in Italy make of it when a guy does have to be circumcised for a medical reason? You don't remember it... what if you did? Is it more important that only people who won't remember being circumcised are circumcised... or only people who really need to (or want to) be circumcised have it done?

In the USA not remembering something you didn't need trumps remembering something you did need.

Now- the fact that you don't remember it makes me think that you were a really little kid when this all went down. My brother was circumcised in Germany 50 years ago, by a German Dr. who deemed his little infant foreskin too tight. My parents, first time parents, went along with the doctor's recommendation to circumcise. When I found this out I was horrified because it's really common, in fact, normal, for a baby's foreskin to be tight. There was nothing wrong with my brother!

There was a survey by Jacob Oster done a while ago that discovered that boys who don't have a retractable foreskin almost 100% will have everything in order without any intervention at all by the time they are teens... another paper by a French Dr. Michel Beauge approached phimosis in teenage boys just by offering them some information about how to masturbate differently...and it worked!

I had an Italian boyfriend who had a stretchmark type scar on his foreskin and he told me that it was caused by a Dr. who forcefully and painfully tore his foreskin when he was a very young boy. Many doctors and parents have ideas about when retraction is supposed to happen, and also how boys should be cleaned and there are a lot of kids to this day- being hurt by bad information living on in the actions of well meaning people. These days we know that you don't force a foreskin on a baby because you can tear it and cause micro-tearing that develops into inelastic scarring. We also have steroid ointments now to help stretch, and there are also very conservative surgical approaches that don't cut anything off- but make the opening wider (Z or Y -plasty) So, while you seem resigned to the fact that your circumcision truly was needed and unavoidable... due to your very young age- I have my doubts.... even if it was needed at the time, I'm pretty sure that a kid in your shoes in 2011 would have other options available to him.

[Malakaibeats]

I really can't give you much data about Italy because I was actually born and raised in England, I've been living here for little over 6 years. What I can say is that my parents (who are 100% Italian) would have never even thought of it if it hadn't been a standard medical procedure for a standard medical necessity. Circumcising a child on a 'whim' is wrong, in my opinion. I haven't really discussed circumcision with my Italian friends, let's just say it doesn't really come up as a subject of conversation when we're hanging out, lol.

The story about your Italian boyfriend does little more than confirm my already firm belief that the Italian medical system, from birth to death, is dismal. My cousin was born with severe brain damage because she was delivered by a team of incompetents who cut off supply of oxygen to her brain with their poorly executed procedure. These cases are quite common even nowadays.

[Saint_James]

I'm sure this will help with the argument.

I was uncut up until 6th grade (12 years old), then my brother wanted one from being in the showers with the hockey team. So I wasn't forced to get one, but i just ended up getting one without any real knowledge on the subject. I guess i got it high and tight, which since my dick grew from 12 years old to 19, its gotten tight. Kind of a pain in the ass, will probably do some foreskin restoration, very light, not spending money on those f*cked up devices. I still have feeling of course and can get off real quick, but literally cannot get off from condoms for the most part.

Overall, circumcisions are fine, but you just don't want to get it too tight. If i had the choice now, i'd probably still get cut, but get like a low and loose so my anteater is gone, but i still have almost all my feeling.

In the future, ill keep my kids uncut and let them decide when they are like 13-14 years old and have them research it before they get it done.

[Plainandtall]

Saint-James- That's a great approach, but I think that a boy should be a mature adult with a full understanding of sexual dynamics before he is invited to make a decision that will impact him for the rest of his life. How many adults are embarrassed by their 8th grade *haircut* in the yearbook or their favorite pop band? Let them grow up and come to the choice on their own. Most adult men wouldn't even consider it, but if you offer it as an option to a child- you load the dice. That, and as you said- the surgeon can be more accurate and the man can express exactly what he's after only when his body is done growing.


Ah-ha...Malakai- this explains your mastery of English!

I'm so sorry to hear about your cousin's birth injury.

I do feel a bit defensive of Italian doctors as I have some to thank for removing a gangrenous appendix- after being sick with it for nine months in the USA with many tests and without diagnosis..finally I had another acute episode in Pisa and those surgeons went right to work and got me out of a really bad spot- and yes- the ambulance drove right through Miracle Square and I saw the leaning tower out the window from the stretcher! The system may be a mess, but I'm living proof that there are good physicians in there.

I've got such a chip on my shoulder about this crap that our American doctors are doing to boys, the Italians look like saints to me in comparison. A female Dr. once bragged to me that she had circumcised over 5000 baby boys (and then to drive it home she added) "...and the only ones I felt bad about were the Jews- because I was taking the money from the Mohel."

Here is an article that may be interesting to you, from England- and written in 1989- it suggests that 2/3 of the circumcisions recommended by doctors were actually unnecessary:
http://www.cirp.org/library/treatmen...sis/rickwood2/

[roronoa3000]

this thread again.