Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Women's Issues' started by B_Bette, Aug 1, 2006.
Please comment in addition to voting if you'd like.
Kahuma: Did you read? Mothers! You do not have the proper equipment, (unless your profile is incorrectly filled out) and you have skewed the results.
I will choose not to circumcize. I have long preffered uncut men, but I used to be more indifferent about this issue, figuring it was something for the father to decide. However, as I am no longer indifferent, no man could make this happen to any child of mine but my son himself, should I ever have one. I'm currently really into a guy who is cut, and he wants to have his children cut. I told him I could flex on the meat issue, but on this I will not budge. No one makes this decision for a man. He can do it if he wants later, but once done, it cannot truly be undone. If we do decide to get together, I will show him videos of baby boys having the procedure, and ask him if he really could subject a baby to that. I may find some to show him anyway.
for me it has nothing to do with what I prefer and everything to do with the above. Mr.Sares is cut and assumed we'd cut our boy, but I showed him pictures of the procedure and told him he'd have to arrange it and tell the midwives what he was doing, since he'd have to take the baby into the hospital for the first time, to have the procedure done. it cooled his jets pretty fast.
if he had been hell-bent and tried to take my baby to the hospital I probably wouldn't have kept my cool. I'd have freaked the fuck out. but Mr.Sares was able to get over the "I want my son to look like me" factor, thank god.
I love the way it looks and feels, but as I'm not planning to have sex with my sons, that's not a part of the decision for me either! :biggrin1: Yeah, the dude I like and I have discussed this because I won't exclusively date someone I wouldn't marry, so I like to get deal-breakers out of the way. This can be a deal-breaking issue, and I firmly put both feet down about it. If my son has a phimosis, I should be able to find this out on my own during early bathing, and I'll read up on foreskin stretching. I plan to have my children similarly to the way you had your son: midwives (or my pseudo-uncle, an OBGYN, if he's still living and willing, or an OBGYN who makes house calls, but I haven't found any while doing my research) and no pain medication, which I consider toxic, and therefore bad for baby. So a circ. would be my son's first trip to the hospital too. I don't want him exposed to that. I don't want to risk that someone else will feed him either, becassue I feel very strongly about breast feeding, and very strongly about the consumption of animal products and chemicals. I cannot budge on this issue. I simply cannot. I think this man I'm into has a beautiful dick, and since he's happy with his circumcision, I'm happy with it too. Still, wouldn't it be great if he'd been able to choose?
Without question i perfer cut men and i'd have my son cut if i were to ever have a baby.
I voted for every option available. Polltard.
I'm cut, my two sons are not.
Warning - graphic and disturbing images.
I let my self get cut when i was 16 years old. So I'll leave it to my imaginary son if he wants to or not.
"I will leave it up to the doctors/medical community."
Ummm, would someone seriously choose this option?
(not counting Spladle, of course)
Yes, SurferGirCA, one of the reasons of circumcision is the so called "phimosis", which a medical problem.
In Europe, except for jewish and muslim, the first (and I would say only) cause of circumcision is medical. Consequence : less cut men in europe than in the states.
where i am from its pretty uncommon to get circumsized, of course there are exeptions where someone might need to be cut but thats rare.
Of course you cant stand in the way of peoples beleifs so jewish people and muslims are always going to be cut.
I understand people wanting there kids to be like them be them cut/uncut but i beleive such a thing should be up to the kid himself, like getting a tattoo or peircings. If you want to mess with your body its up to you and you alone.
I've surely made it known, I abhor the idea of infant circumcision.
However, I have only girls, and we are not having any more kids!
My husband is intact and I would not have any sons circumcised because
I can see it is not necessary.
Other than religious or medical reasons, I have never understood why people have circumcisions done at all.
I recently read up on the topic in a different context and want to share the findings with you:
The foreskin has twelve known functions.
1. to cover and bond with the synechia so as to permit the development of the mucosal surface of the glans and inner foreskin.
2. to protect the infant's glans from feces and ammonia in diapers.
3. to protect the glans penis from friction and abrasion throughout life.
4. to keep the glans moisturized and soft with emollient oils.
5. to lubricate the glans.
6. to coat the glans with a waxy protective substance.
7. to provide sufficient skin to cover an erection by unfolding.
8. to provide an aid to masturbation and foreplay.
9. to serve as an aid to penetration.
10. to reduce friction and chafing during intercourse.
11. to serve as erogenous tissue because of its rich supply of erogenous receptors.
12. to contact and stimulate the G-spot of the female partner.
HOW DOES CIRCUMCISION HARM?
The "medical" debate about the "potential health benefits" of circumcision rarely addresses its real effects.
A. Circumcision denudes: Depending on the amount of skin cut off, circumcision robs a male of as much as 80 percent or more of his penile skin. Depending on the foreskin's length, cutting it off makes the penis as much as 25 percent or more shorter.
B. Careful anatomical investigations have shown that circumcision cuts off more than 3 feet of veins, arteries, and capillaries, 240 feet of nerves, and more than 20,000 nerve endings. The foreskin's muscles, glands, mucous membrane, and epithelial tissue are destroyed, as well.
C. Circumcision desensitizes the penis radically. Foreskin amputation means severing the rich nerve network and all the nerve receptors in the foreskin itself. Circumcision almost always damages or destroys the frenulum. The loss of the protective foreskin desensitizes the glans.
D. Circumcision disables: The amputation of so much penile skin permanently immobilizes whatever skin remains, preventing it from gliding freely over the shaft and glans. This loss of mobility destroys the mechanism by which the glans is normally stimulated.
E. Circumcision disfigures: Circumcision alters the appearance of the penis drastically. It permanently externalizes the glans, normally an internal organ. Circumcision leaves a large circumferential surgical scar on the penile shaft.
Depending on the amount of skin cut off and how the scar forms, the circumcised penis may be permanently twisted, or curve or bow during erection. The contraction of the scar tissue may pull the shaft into the abdomen, in effect shortening the penis or burying it completely.
F. Circumcision disrupts circulation: Circumcision interrupts the normal circulation of blood throughout the penile skin system and glans. The blood flowing into major penile arteries is obstructed by the line of scar
tissue at the point of incision, creating backflow instead of feeding the branches and capillary networks beyond the scar. Deprived of blood, the meatus may contract and scarify, obstructing the flow of urine.
Circumcision also severs the lymph vessels, interrupting the circulation of lymph and sometimes causing lymphedema, a painful, disfiguring condition in which the remaining skin of the penis swells with trapped lymph fluid.
G. Circumcision harms the developing brain: Recent studies published in leading medical journals have reported that circumcision has long-lasting detrimental effects on the developing brain, adversely altering the brain's perception centers. Circumcised boys have a lower pain threshold than girls or intact boys. Developmental neuropsychologist Dr. James Prescott suggests that circumcision can cause deeper and more disturbing levels of neurological damage, as well.
H. Circumcision is unhygienic and unhealthy: One of the most common myths about circumcision is that it makes the penis cleaner and easier to take care of. This is not true. Eyes without eyelids would not be cleaner; neither would a penis without its foreskin. The artificially externalized glans and meatus of the circumcised penis are constantly exposed to abrasion and dirt, making the circumcised penis, in fact, more unclean. The loss of the protective foreskin leaves the urinary tract vulnerable to invasion by bacterial and viral pathogens.
The circumcision wound is larger than most people imagine. It is not just the circular point of union between the outer and inner layers of the remaining skin. Before a baby is circumcised, his foreskin must be torn from his glans, literally skinning it alive. This creates a large open area of raw, bleeding flesh, covered at best with a layer of undeveloped proto-mucosa. Germs can easily enter the damaged tissue and bloodstream through the raw glans and, even more easily, through the incision itself.
Even after the wound has healed, the externalized glans and meatus are still forced into constant unnatural contact with urine, feces, chemically treated diapers, and other contaminants.
I. Circumcision is always risky: Circumcision always carries the risk of serious, even tragic, consequences. Its surgical complication rate is one in 500. These complications include uncontrollable bleeding and fatal infections. There are many published case reports of gangrene following circumcision. Medical journals have published numerous accounts of babies who have had part or all of their glans cut off while they were being circumcised. Other fully conscious, unanesthetized babies have had their entire penis burned off with an electrocautery gun. The September 1989 Journal of Urology published an account of four such cases. The article described the sex-change operation as "feminizing genitoplasty," performed on these babies in an attempt to change them into girls. The March 1997 Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine described one young person's horror on learning that "she" had been born a normal male, but that a circumciser had burned his penis off when he was a baby. Many other similar cases have been documented. Infant circumcision has a reported death rate of one in 500,000.
J. Circumcision harms mothers: Scientific studies have consistently shown that circumcision disrupts a child's behavioral development. Studies performed at the University of Colorado School of Medicine showed that circumcision is followed by prolonged, unrestful non-REM (rapid-eye-movement) sleep. In response to the lengthy bombardment of their neural pathways with unbearable pain, the circumcised babies withdrew into a kind of semicoma that lasted days or even weeks.
Numerous other studies have proven that circumcision disrupts the mother-infant bond during the crucial period after birth. Research has also shown that circumcision disrupts feeding patterns. In a study at the Washington University School of Medicine, most babies would not nurse right after they were circumcised, and those who did would not look into their mothers' eyes.
K. Circumcision violates patients' and human rights: No one has the right to cut off any part of someone else's genitals without that person's competent, fully informed consent. Since it is the infant who must bear the consequences, circumcision violates his legal rights both to refuse treatment and to seek alternative treatment. In 1995, the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Bioethics stated that only a competent patient can give patient consent or informed consent. An infant is obviously too young to consent to anything. He must be protected from anyone who would take advantage of his defenselessness. The concept of informed parental permission allows for medical interventions in situations of clear and immediate medical necessity only, such as disease, trauma, or deformity. The human penis in its normal, uncircumcised state satisfies none of these requirements.
March 1, 1999: After a two year investigation, the American Academy of Pediatrics concluded that the "potential medical benefits" of infant circumcision aren't significant enough and therefore, they do not recommend it as a routine procedure.
*It was known even in the late 1800s that the removal of the foreskin (the only moveable part of the penis) would reduce sexual sensitivity and restrict movement of the penile shaft.
The population of the United States is 260 Million. The entire world population is 5 Billion, 700 Million. Out of those, 2 Billion, 647 Million are males currently living. 18% of them are circumcised.
Of the world's male population, the breakdown of the circumcised and intact are:
79 million American infant circs
9 million American child or adult circs
13 million Canada, UK, New Zealand & Australia infant circs
27 million rest of world infant circs
44 million child or adult circs other parts of world
315 million Muslim child/adolescent circumcisions
487 million = TOTAL MEN CIRCUMCISED WORLDWIDE (18%)
2 billion 160 million = TOTAL MEN INTACT WORLDWIDE (82%)
2 billion 647 million = Total Men Living Worldwide
Out of the Worldwide Total of 487 Million Circumcised Men:
65% occur as Muslim cultural circumcisions
15% occur in other countries
3% occur in other English speaking countries
17% occur in the U.S.
**Above statistics complied by Demographics International
That's a good idea. Here's another persuasive thought:
Only men know how truly ultra-sensitive the penis is. So imagine being a NEWBORN, how sensitive your skin is, and having the skin RIPPPED off of it...
Is that what it was about for him? Truly? Did he say that?
I won't exclusively date someone I wouldn't marry, so I like to get deal-breakers out of the way.
Yup. Why waste our precious time?
I think this man I'm into has a beautiful dick, and since he's happy with his circumcision, I'm happy with it too. Still, wouldn't it be great if he'd been able to choose?
He might say he still would have chosen it. But like I said in another post... RIPPING!
WOMEN LEAVE THEIR BODIES FOR THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY TO DO WITH AS THEY WISH ALL THE TIME!!! Just having a baby in a hospital is UNempowering. You give birth against gravity, causing serious unnecessary distress, and then they GRAB the kid away from you, snip his tiny penis and do god knows what else to the kid. I've read and heard sad stories from women about this unbearable time when their newborns are cruelly whisked away from them, in the hands of doctors, nurses, even the fathers before the mothers. It's DISGUSTING.
There is a very long history of the medical community and government abusing women medically. THALIDOMIDE. Nuff said.
That's interesting. Why did you decide to have it done?
That's something I don't understand. Why is it important to a FATHER'S identity for his son to be just like him?