The Sensitive Issue of Circumcision

JoeEllison said:
Everything that costs money makes someone money. Every professional field has good and bad practitioners. Neither point really makes a difference to this discussion pro OR con.
Click to expand...

It's about 50% of OBs who don't use pain relievers at all.
 
About porn...since about half the baby boys are being left intact now, the porn of the future will probably be a mix of intact and circed.
 
Southwind17 said:
You mean like some sort of secret "hand shake"(!!!), so to speak?! Shame Monty Python didn't do a skit on this one, or did they?! Would you not consider the old kippah might suffice, or is that not sufficiently permanent, you know, in case the little fella decides to renounce his religion in adulthood, you know, if he feels he wants to determine his identity for himself. Just asking.
Click to expand...


The religious authorities whom I trust recommended circumcision.

Don't bother writing back about how silly that sounds to you. I know it sounds silly to you. You wouldn't have written your post in the first place if it didn't sound silly to you. However, that is my entire justification. I will never change my mind, be persuaded by your argument or second-guess my beliefs. I have already gladly agreed that this may not appear rational to you. I have even conceded that non-Jews should probably not be circumcised because there is no objective medical justification.

However, this religious belief is more important to me than any argument you think you might be able to conjur against it. I ask that you not bother replying, not waste your time or energy and not concern yourself with my religious beliefs for even one second more.
 
Last edited:
Southwind17 said:
I could be wrong here, but this makes me wonder whether you believe that just because the glans is fully exposed then it must be a circumcised penis, and whether your circumcision has led to such misunderstanding (I knew I'd find some valid anti-circumcision justification somewhere down the line!). To my mind, a penis with a fully retracted foreskin looks pretty much identical to a circumcised penis, unless, of course, it has a particularly ill-fitting foreskin!
Click to expand...

Oh ya, I'm aware of that - BUT - young boys may not be right away. The fact is that our society has the image of a circumcised penis as the most desirable, much like I'm sure women go through some boob-worries...

So while the penises in porn may actually be uncut - they look to be cut - and you wont see too much foreskin being pulled back in porn. Heck, take a look at Superbad and the penis cartoons - there's a book you can buy that collects them all too - every penis in there is cut.

Aside from that its well known that women - generally speaking - prefer circumcised penises. Anecdotally, this is corroborated with the women I've discussed this issue with.

All I'm saying is it creates an insecurity in some uncut men, that their units are somehow less desirable than cut ones.

That being said, I think this psychological issue can be easily overcome, especially after a young man goes through his first successful sexual experiences - and this risk I think is the only real downside to being uncut. I think if we weigh it against the negatives of being cut, that keeping the penis intact wins out.
 
Praktik said:
Aside from that its well known that women - generally speaking - prefer circumcised penises. Anecdotally, this is corroborated with the women I've discussed this issue with.
Click to expand...

Ok you have anecdote. Do you have any evidence? I suspect if it is true at all it is true because they are used to it.

All I'm saying is it creates an insecurity in some uncut men, that their units are somehow less desirable than cut ones.
Click to expand...

Everything causes insecurity in adolescents. I hardly think this is significant :)
 
Praktik said:
Aside from that its well known that women - generally speaking - prefer circumcised penises. Anecdotally, this is corroborated with the women I've discussed this issue with.

All I'm saying is it creates an insecurity in some uncut men, that their units are somehow less desirable than cut ones.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm different from most uncut men, but when sexually aroused my foreskin automatically and fully retracts, thereby giving the appearance, I guess, of an uncut penis. Maybe I should suggest this idea to Marc Forster, the director of the next Bond movie Quantum of Solace. I reckon it would go nicely with a radio transmitting cigarette lighter that doubles as a video camera! I wonder which one Bond would put to better use?!
 
Fiona said:
Ok you have anecdote. Do you have any evidence? I suspect if it is true at all it is true because they are used to it.

Everything causes insecurity in adolescents. I hardly think this is significant:)
Click to expand...


I can agree with your second sentence for sure and I think I did above - i dunno if you saw the Penn + Teller on circumcision, but the uncut guy who was with a girl who wanted their first son to be cut mentioned having a few rough experiences growing up, and the girl stated her worry that being uncut would subject the kid to worries since she thought most girls were more comfortable with/desired cut penises.

AS for evidence - I just have recollections of surveys, and the fact that almost every girl I've spoken to said they preferred cut penises.

Maybe your experience is different. In the same P + T episode they talk to some women who LOVE uncut penises. They're out there for sure, but generally speaking, I don't think its all that debatable that the cultural standard is for a cut penis, much like the hourglass is the cultural standard women are measured up to (by and large).
 
I can accept it is the standard in America. It isn't here.


the fact that almost every girl I've spoken to said they preferred cut penises.
Click to expand...

I notice you are cut though: it occurs to me that women are nice that way ......







(j/k)
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
Appendix and wisdom teeth, I suppose. Although I still have both and am none the worse for wear.
Click to expand...

How about virtually every part of the human body? Cut it off -- it can't get sick. Easy peasy.

Honestly, though, I cannot think of a compelling reason to perform this procedure on a person who gets no say in it. If you're worried about hygiene, then teach him how to clean himself. Apart from hygiene concerns, what other reason apart from "woo" could anyone have for doing this?


M.
 
Moochie said:
How about virtually every part of the human body? Cut it off -- it can't get sick. Easy peasy.

Honestly, though, I cannot think of a compelling reason to perform this procedure on a person who gets no say in it. If you're worried about hygiene, then teach him how to clean himself. Apart from hygiene concerns, what other reason apart from "woo" could anyone have for doing this?


M.
Click to expand...

Besides the reasons you keep ignoring? :rolleyes:
 
kellyb said:
An infant might not remember, but an adult can be sedated and given good pain relievers afterwards. Plus, an adult doesn't have pee on the wound like an infant in a diaper does.

Also, the actual procedure is more physiological trauma for an infant penis, because the foreskin has to be ripped off the glans (like ripping a fingernail off a finger) before the prepuce can be removed. It's totally seperated "naturally" by adulthood. If you watch a video of one, it really looks like separating the foreskin from the glans is by far the worst part.
Click to expand...

Yes, I actually have heard of that. The case seems to be that as a child, it's physically more painful but the pain is short-term while an adult's is more complicated, carries more risk and is long-term.

I would think that an adult or teenage circumcision would carry much more psychological trauma, such as loss of sexual pleasure or pain during intercourse or an erection (whcih an infant doesn't have to deal with at all).

Fiona said:
But that is not the point, is it? And adult can make a choice for himself unless there are genuine ethical reasons to deny it. The pain and complications and all of that are of course to be made explicit, so that the choice is informed. Are you really arguing that a grown man cannot decide, for religious or any other reasons. that he wishes to be circumcised? I can understand that if you are committed to the idea that it is harmful, and therefore violates some version of the hypocratic oath. But I had not understood that was your position.

If it is your position then it seems to me to follow that it cannot be done to an infant. We have seen it argued that this is a matter of parental choice and so long as the procedure itself is at least neutral then that is fine. However the right of a parent to decide for a child is predicated on the idea that that right will be exercised in the interest of that child: parents cannot just do what they like. They get special status because it is presumed they are best placed to decide what is in the child's interest usually. Where there is evidence they do not follow that precept, then the right can be overridden by the court.

It seems to be inherent in your stance that you believe it is harmless for infants but not for adults. Well all surgical procedures carry some risk: and some procedures are more risky for adults than children. Yet I am uncomfortable with the idea that you would prohibit an informed adult from accepting those risks no matter how small: and yet allow that same adult to accept it on behalf of a child (again no matter how small)

I don't accept you have no right to an opinion on the basis of gender. But I do question your assertion that adults remember pain in any meaningful sense. Women who have babies tell me they do not shortly after the birth. My own experience with other kinds of pain tells me that I do not remember it much after the event. Pain which is chosen is perhaps different from accidental pain and different again from enforced pain: I have no way of knowing but it seems counter intuitive. Is your experience different?
Click to expand...

Well, like I said, I would think that in many ways it would be more humane to be cut early in life. I myself would certainly never want to undergo an adult circumcision.

I think that you don't remember the pain itself but you certainly remember the suffering and can be pained and traumatized by the experience. An infant's pain is real, to be sure, but if there is no possible memory of the procedure itself and no one on Earth remembers being circumcised, it's as though it never happened. An infant doesn't even have the capacity to be shocked or upset by the pain 5 minutes later.

Any physical trauma would be as a result of the procedure and not the procedure itself, while an adult can be scarred by both. No joke intended.
 
Matthew Best said:
Loss Leader said:
By the way, the article wrongly calls Wilson a dictor, He's still a student.
Click to expand...
Interesting Freudian slip, there.
Click to expand...
Or Freudian snip!


Loss Leader said:
The religious authorities whom I trust recommended circumcision.

Don't bother writing back about how silly that sounds to you. I know it sounds silly to you. You wouldn't have written your post in the first place if it didn't sound silly to you. However, that is my entire justification. I will never change my mind, be persuaded by your argument or second-guess my beliefs. I have already gladly agreed that this may not appear rational to you. I have even conceded that non-Jews should probably not be circumcised because there is no objective medical justification.

However, this religious belief is more important to me than any argument you think you might be able to conjur against it. I ask that you not bother replying, not waste your time or energy and not concern yourself with my religious beliefs for even one second more.
Click to expand...
Also Jewish – but Reform, and circumcision has no religious significance for me. I fully understand your point of view, though, and I'd say there's a strong argument that it's to some extent rational.

If you have reason to believe that your son would wish to be circumcised then it clearly makes sense to have it done while he's an infant. As you and Eeney pointed out, if he chooses (or considers) circumcision later on then he will certainly regret that it wasn't done at an age when it would have been trivial.

Jews and Muslims do have such a reason. It is, at least, not unlikely that the son will want to identify with his ethnic/religious group when he's older. As a child, an adolescent and an adult he may well not thank you for making him choose between a painful and (possibly) psychologically damaging medical procedure and the feeling, throughout his life, of not being not quite kosher.

I would say, therefore, that it makes sense for Jews and Muslims to have their sons circumcised (though it shouldn't be a big deal if they don't). But that depends on the assumption of a negligible probability of harm. If this is shown to be wrong then I would change my mind - I'm open to evidence.

There's no way to draw any sensible scientific conclusion on the sexual pleasure issue, as the necessary experiments are logically impossible. The Meatal Stenosis complication that kellyb mentioned is certainly worth considering (I was only vaguely aware of it), but absurd, hysterical denunciations such as this:
kellyb said:
I think amputating children's sex organs is completely weird and wrong, and a human right's violation, personally.
Click to expand...
and this:
Magyar said:
you know every time this nonsense comes up I have to point out the double standard that this subject receives

Interesting interview with Ayaan Hirsi-Ali.

She's an international "star" because she was circumcised, yet no one bats an eye that millions of boys are.
Click to expand...
don't impress.
 
@Eeneyminniemo. I do not really understand what you mean by suffering as distinct from pain. Do you perhaps mean the anticipation of pain? I certainly agree that an adult has this before surgery etc and an infant doesn't. But it is not a big deal right afterwards, at least as I have experienced it, any more than pain is after it is over. It is remembered as an intellectual matter and this is different for an infant but I do not honestly think that memory is problematic in the case of elective surgery. Well for some it may be, but this is not intrinsic to the procedure itself, I think. As to trauma, in chosen surgery I assume you mean the physical trauma of insult to the body? Well I think that applies to both adults and children really. Is it really true that children stop feeling pain in 5 minutes? After a part of their body has been removed? Do they not have ongoing pain from wounds as adults do? I was genuinely unaware of that. What about urine in contact with the wound as raised by kellyb? Is that really not an issue? I do realise that certain connections are not present in the infant brain but it does surprise me that paiin is one of them since I would have thought pain served the same warning and survival functions as pain does in adults: albeit that the response must sometimes be mediated through an adult
 
Last edited:
Being squeezed through a birth canal would likely be a painful experience if the infant could feel pain normally.
 
Fiona said:
Is there evidence it is not?
Click to expand...

I'm sure it is.

But I don't see what that has to do with anything. Squeezing a baby out is excruciatingly painful, but that doesn't mean it's ok to perform hysterectomies on women without anaesthesia 12 hours after childbirth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom