Is Circumcision Right or Wrong?

[jdp]

We haven't had him yet -- he's due in a couple of weeks. The circumcision discussion was at our interview to determine if he would be our pediatrician. I don't know if we actually asked him if he did the procedure himself. ? Pregnant brain forgets.

Congratulations then defiantly a lucky boy. Just out of curiosity, what state do you live in? I suspect that how the physician approaches this issue is regionally dependent too.

It would be interesting to know if this physician does them in spite of the fact that he knows they are of little medical value, generally. I've had discussions with many who are that way and it always perplexes me. I think that those who recognize this need to be firmer in their position and refuse to do them. This would hopefully make parents think longer about it if they have to spend more time finding someone who is willing to perform it.

 

[Polaris]

In fact, reading this reminded me of an episode of Nip/Tuck I watched in which the teenage son was rejected by a girl because he was uncut and he asked his parents for the surgery. Which was refused. So, he cut himself, bled copiously, and got the surgery anyway.

This is not a great endorsement for the uncut male. If I were an uncut teen watching that, well, it would make me worry a bit. It would make me worry more if that were the message I seemed to be getting in general from the media. And it generally does seem to be the message.

You forgot to mention that the son cuts himself to directions via podcast online. I guess that's one those dreaded "back-alley circumcisions" that would supposedly happen if it was no longer offered as elective-surgery in American hospitals.

There was a similar message in an episode of Sex in the City where, IIRC, after one of the shallow quartet sleeps with an uncut man they all agree to have all their sons circumcised so that no woman will ever say they look "like a shar pei." In these cases I simply sigh and flash the screen a middle-finger-salute.

Of course, there two examples more reflect the attitudes of their writers, but it does say a lot about the issue to imagine the outcry if the shoe was on the other foot for reasons other than satire.

In reality, I have only anecdote to point to (the woman who told me she would never sleep with or go down on an uncut guy....after she'd done both to me more than twice). I don't see aesthetics being as big of an issue as it seems to be portrayed, since the uncircumcised penis only is distinguishable from the circumcised when flaccid. And if it's about to be put to use and still flaccid, there are probably more pressing issues to contend with.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Wrong. I mean, it's just wrong. It's a damn shame how many men are circumcised.

De gustibus non est disputandum

Just because you may prefer a hint of fumunda cheese as garnish does not mean that all ladies do.

 

[Bram Kaandorp]

De gustibus non est disputandum

Just because you may prefer a hint of fumunda cheese as garnish does not mean that all ladies do.

I don't think that false dichotomy will fly.

It's not either uncircumcised-cheese or circumcised-no cheese.

There is this thing called washing which, when done regularly, takes care of filth.

Sorry for sounding patronising, but I had already posted this message.

 

[anor277]

The only convincing argument I've heard for circumcision was voiced by a woman I knew who had had more men than most of us have had hot dinners. She maintained that she always obtained greater sexual satisfaction from a cut male than an uncut male.

Whether this is right or wrong (and of course historically it is male pleasure that is important), the choice always remains for an uncircumcised, adult male to submit to the procedure. Such a choice is not available to the circumcised male.

 

[Bram Kaandorp]

The only convincing argument I've heard for circumcision was voiced by a woman I knew who had had more men than most of us have had hot dinners. She maintained that she always obtained greater sexual satisfaction from a cut male than an uncut male.

Whether this is right or wrong (and of course historically it is male pleasure that is important), the choice always remains for an uncircumcised, adult male to submit to the procedure. Such a choice is not available to the circumcised male.

I wonder how women would react if men would state that "I have better satisfaction if the woman has no labia".

Would women let their labia be completely removed because of it?

Or would they (rightfully) tell men to shut up and deal with it?

 

[zooterkin]

The only convincing argument I've heard for circumcision was voiced by a woman I knew who had had more men than most of us have had hot dinners. She maintained that she always obtained greater sexual satisfaction from a cut male than an uncut male.

Well, I wouldn't find it convincing, even if it was true. Did she give any indication as to why there was more satisfaction? The obvious answer would be reduced sensitivity leading to increased time to orgasm for the man, giving increased chance of orgasm for the woman, but that's a 'problem' that can be fixed without surgery.

 

[anor277]

Well, I wouldn't find it convincing, even if it was true. ................

Of course, we don't know either way, and we are unlikely to know. The only person that I know who was circumcised as an adult and wrote to tell about the difference in sexual experience was Richard Burton, the 19th century explorer. I recall that Dick (who did put it about a bit before and after the snip) wasn't very satisfied with the streamlined version.

 

[Ryokan]

De gustibus non est disputandum

Just because you may prefer a hint of fumunda cheese as garnish does not mean that all ladies do.

Perhaps you should've read the thread or done some research.

I'm not circumcised, and I've never seen dick cheese on my dick, not even in those periods of life where I've gone days and weeks without showering (Like the army.).

Coming from a country where only a tiny religious minority snip off bits of their babies, dick cheese is far, far, far from as common as people from countries where a majority snip off bits of their babies may believe.

 

[jdp]

De gustibus non est disputandum

Just because you may prefer a hint of fumunda cheese as garnish does not mean that all ladies do.

Perhaps you should've read the thread or done some research.

I'm not circumcised, and I've never seen dick cheese on my dick, not even in those periods of life where I've gone days and weeks without showering (Like the army.).

Coming from a country where only a tiny religious minority snip off bits of their babies, dick cheese is far, far, far from as common as people from countries where a majority snip off bits of their babies may believe.

Ryokan, you have to realize this is one of those myths that people from cultures that circumcise repeat to try and justify the practice. Never mind that it's just a bit less ridiculous then the "he has to match his father" excuse.

 

[rocketdodger]

The only convincing argument I've heard for circumcision was voiced by a woman I knew who had had more men than most of us have had hot dinners. She maintained that she always obtained greater sexual satisfaction from a cut male than an uncut male.

Not sure why that is "convincing" given that if you do any research online you will find that:

1) The majority of women who prefer natural men do so because it feels better for them.
2) The majority of women who prefer cut men do so because they think it looks* better

*which is of course only when the penis is not erect.

I liken this to another monumentally stupid phenomena:

1) The majority of women who prefer western culture do so because they have more freedoms to do what they want.
2) The majority of women who prefer radical islamic culture do so because they think the west destroys family values.

Also: If you knew a woman who preferred cut men because of the feeling, then either she was an outlier OR she was referring to the fact that natural men reach climax so much faster. Note that the latter possbility doesn't help the pro-circ argument anyway, and regarding the former I don't think I have ever heard of a single woman actually preferring the feeling of a cut penis inside of her to that of a natural one.

Logic, people -- use it.

 

[catsmate]

Aaargh I promised myself not to get involved in this again. Anyway.
"Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision" is available here in a shortened form.
I particularly like this comment, excerpted from here:

One rabbi interviewed is at least honest about circumcision

"It’s painful, it’s abusive, it’s traumatic, and if anybody does it who isn’t in a covenant ought to be put in prison…I do abusive things because I’m in covenant with god."

 

[jdp]

Aaargh I promised myself not to get involved in this again. Anyway.
"Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision" is available here in a shortened form.
I particularly like this comment, excerpted from here:

The honesty of that interview was refreshing. In fact, the whole film is loaded with interesting tidbits like that. The director of that film, Eli, is on a 30 city tour of the US and I had the opportunity to help bring it to DC. At each of the stops Eli makes, there is a Q & A after the film which is turned into a Podcast and published on the Film's website and on iTunes.

Some are more interesting than others but all usually have something interesting to say on the matter. I'd say the longer ones are the most interesting as well as the special interviews. I think anyone with even a passing interest would enjoy both the film and the follow up discussions.

 

[AmandaM]

Congratulations then defiantly a lucky boy. Just out of curiosity, what state do you live in? I suspect that how the physician approaches this issue is regionally dependent too.

Thanks! We're in Indiana again now.

It would be interesting to know if this physician does them in spite of the fact that he knows they are of little medical value, generally.

Actually, I got this clarified. The state doesn't define it, but it is our HOSPITAL'S policy that only an MD or your obstetrician does the circumcision! I thought the pede did, but apparently they do not have privileges to do "surgery" (which is what the circ is considered) so it must be done by a surgeon. I think this is only the hospital's policy, and not a state law.

Newborns can be circ'd in our hospital by a surgeon under a local anesthesia, but after so many days (can't remember the number) it has to be done with general anesthesia, and done in a hospital setting. So I'm not sure there is actually ever a time when the pede would do the procedure. The mohel usually does it on the 8th day, if I remember correctly.

 

[jdp]

Thanks! We're in Indiana again now.

That's even better, such a rational perspective from a mid-west doc. No offense but I would have figured you were on the coasts.

 

[Leumas]

Minutes 4:14-4:30 of this video might be interesting in relation to the OP

By the way...the woman is called Lucy...short for Lucifer....and the guy is Mr. Deity.

 

[AmandaM]

That's even better, such a rational perspective from a mid-west doc. No offense but I would have figured you were on the coasts.

No offense taken I much prefer the east coast, but we're here for a while anyway.

 

[jdp]

Aaargh I promised myself not to get involved in this again. Anyway.
"Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision" is available here in a shortened form.
I particularly like this comment, excerpted from here:

Following up on this post, there is a recently posted interview with the director on Youtube which discusses his views, the tour and related things.


http://youtu.be/13mvKdv65BQ

No offense taken I much prefer the east coast, but we're here for a while anyway.

Glad to hear.

 

[Nicole Friedman]

Actually I don't think they have the right. They might be the parents, but that doesn't give them a free pass to do whatever they like with their son's foreskin.
I still have mine and I'm very glad I have. Without getting too much into detail, let's just say there's a lot of feeling in it, and I'd never have it removed for any other reason than if it would threaten my health.

If parents think it's necessary for religious reasons, they can believe that. But they believe that, not the child itself. To me it's not about the right or beliefs of the parents, because it's not their body. The way I see it, they have nothing to say in the matter. When the child is old enough (say, 18 years) to decide for himself, let him decide. Of course they could still be influenced by their parents to have it done, but then at least they've had the chance to play with their foreskin and know what it feels like.

As for the medical part, I'm no expert on that, but from all that I've read and heard about it, it's just not necessary. If there are no direct health risks caused by the foreskin, leave it on there. Just wash it like you wash other parts of your body. Nobody goes around chopping off their child's ears because they might get infected when you don't wash them.

However, in Judaism you must circumcise on the 8th day. To do it as an adult is not fulfilling the mitzvah. I will admit my bias; having grown up in the Jewish culture I believe that a bris is a beautiful ceremony. I do not know a single male who was circumcised who wishes that he still had his foreskin. Additionally, since many on here are citing medical concerns, I am very good friends with an immunologist (not Jewish)- he actually was circumcised later in life, by his own choice. He was the one who told me about studies done showing how male circumcision can lead to a reduction in STDS, particularly HIV (his area of expertise)- which can save the lives of thousands, if not millions of people, especially in Africa. If you want to talk about wrongs, let's talk about female circumcision- that is done to kill sexual pleasure and aside from there being zero medical benefit, can harm or even kill the victim.

 

[Nicole Friedman]

Aaargh I promised myself not to get involved in this again. Anyway.
"Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision" is available here in a shortened form.
I particularly like this comment, excerpted from here:

Do you honestly think that this one rabbi speaks for the majority of the Jewish faith? Why is it that rabbis, from Orthodox, Conservative, Reform and other Jewish denominations continue to perform the bris? You may personally not agree with it, but please do not insinuate that rabbis are starting to say that the bris is barbaric.