Is Circumcision Right or Wrong?

[jdp]

I would disagree. I didn't know how to properly clean it when I was younger. So I needed to be taught. If everyone else knows instinctively then good for them. I guess I'll be the idiot.

I certainly wouldn't say "You're an idiot." The high level instructions are to retract, rinse and replace. This is something most teen boys will end up doing in the shower anyway except they'll add repeat to the steps and increase the frequency a couple dozen times. So I do think this is in some sense an instinctive process.

 

[Daald]

I certainly wouldn't say "You're an idiot." The high level instructions are to retract, rinse and replace. This is something most teen boys will end up doing in the shower anyway except they'll add repeat to the steps and increase the frequency a couple dozen times. So I do think this is in some sense an instinctive process.

I understand that as a teenager you would do that since experimentation will lead you down that path. My original message was about young kids that wouldn't do that or might be freaked out by the fact that it can be pulled back. A simple message from a parent at a young age that it is fine and they should do it would go a long way. They are the ones that need to be taught.

 

[jdp]

I understand that as a teenager you would do that since experimentation will lead you down that path. My original message was about young kids that wouldn't do that or might be freaked out by the fact that it can be pulled back. A simple message from a parent at a young age that it is fine and they should do it would go a long way. They are the ones that need to be taught.

And I certainly agree a simple message about it would be fine. But a few things have to be realized. First, most boys can't retract their foreskins until (on average) about 11. So for young boys (those a parent might still be bathing) don't need to clean beneath their foreskins, trying to do so may cause damage; just sitting in and splashing around in the tub is sufficient. Second, even after a boy reaches that point, it's not necessary that it be cleaned everyday. Is it optimal? Sure. But it's no more problematic than any other body part after not showering a week or more.

 

[Daald]

And I certainly agree a simple message about it would be fine. But a few things have to be realized. First, most boys can't retract their foreskins until (on average) about 11. So for young boys (those a parent might still be bathing) don't need to clean beneath their foreskins, trying to do so may cause damage; just sitting in and splashing around in the tub is sufficient. Second, even after a boy reaches that point, it's not necessary that it be cleaned everyday. Is it optimal? Sure. But it's no more problematic than any other body part after not showering a week or more.

We are in agreement then.

Now a question. Why do you say it can't be pulled back before 11? Is it impossible, impractical or hearsay? I have heard from some people that they were instructed to pull back and wash at a young age (younger than 11 was the implication). Were they mistaken?

Thanks

 

[Darat]

We are in agreement then.

Now a question. Why do you say it can't be pulled back before 11? Is it impossible, impractical or hearsay? I have heard from some people that they were instructed to pull back and wash at a young age (younger than 11 was the implication). Were they mistaken?

Thanks

There isn't a set age when it will be possible. Setting 11 (being the age we tend to say is the onset of puberty) is probably a good age to pick if you want a guideline. See: http://kidshealth.org.nz/index.php/ps_pagename/contentpage/pi_id/266 for more information.

 

[pgwenthold]

We are in agreement then.

Now a question. Why do you say it can't be pulled back before 11? Is it impossible, impractical or hearsay? I have heard from some people that they were instructed to pull back and wash at a young age (younger than 11 was the implication). Were they mistaken?

Thanks

The proper approach is to not force it back, and you should only retract when it is readily retractable. That develops naturally over time as it loosens on its own, generally as a result of erections. However, the rate at which that happens is highly variable. I have seen estimates (maybe it was from jdp) that the median age this occurs is as high as 11, although I've generally heard younger.

Our 3 year old's foreskin is loosening, and there have been times when we thought it was getting there, but then it seems to stop retracting, and if we try it hurts, so we don't bother. Now, he gets a lot of erections (like his dad ), and has been since he was really young, so that can contribute. His 1 yo brother (as of Tues!) is not like that. I don't think I've ever seen him with an erection, although he does play with himself, like, constantly (again, similar to his dad ) His foreskin isn't close to retracting, Actually, it's a little narrow right now, and at his 9 mo wellness, the NP inquired whether he had any urination issues. Not that we can tell, that's for sure, because he fulfills his wet diaper quota.

It is certainly the case that there is a lot of bad advice about hygiene, and I attribute it to inexperience of doctors in the US dealing with it. As far as I can tell,

Rule 1 : don't force anything. It will retract when it is ready to retract, and when that happens, you will be able to tell because it will occur easily and without pain. If you encounter anything else, don't bother.

Rule 2: There is no timeline, so don't feel you need to break Rule 1

 

[Daald]

Thank you for the information Darat and pgwenthold.

 

[pgwenthold]

Thank you for the information Darat and pgwenthold.

Actually, I found the website that Darat linked to be very useful. The nice part of it is that it is a legitimate medical website, but from a perspective where non-circumcision is the default, and it is not with an agenda.

I think my summation is fair, but note that has just been my conclusions based on reading things like Darat posted.

 

[Mudcat]

Obviously the religionists practice of circumcision is right. If it weren't than why would they forcibly commit it before the child involved could make an informed decision to get it done?

 

[jdp]

We are in agreement then.

I would say for the most part we seem to be in agreement, unless I missed something. The thing is I think in most cases boys will work this out for themselves though of course I see no reason that parents can't explain it or that it shouldn't also be explained in say a health class. But having said that, they shouldn't be made to feel that there is say some time table and parents shouldn't feel there is either. They shouldn't worry, for example, that their five year old's foreskin doesn't retract at all. Being able to retract their foreskin isn't something that a parent needs to follow and the child needs to say make some steady progress on by some arbitrary point. And in general, parents don't need to worry about it at all. I think that not knowing these things contribute to the 'hygiene' myths with regard to intact boys.

Now a question. Why do you say it can't be pulled back before 11? Is it impossible, impractical or hearsay?

Others have covered this pretty well already. That is an average age when boys can fully retract their foreskin. The process to get to that point varies greatly from one to another. A very small percentage are born with their foreskins separated from the glans but for most, it's a gradual process which may not end until puberty.

The problem for parents, and medical practitioners for that matter, who are not familiar with the process is that they could cause problems by trying to retract a boy to say 'make sure he cleans'. This could cause tearing which might cause infection and might eventually lead to phimosis. The best advice with regard to this issue is that only the boy should ever retract his own foreskin, clearly there are exceptions.

I have heard from some people that they were instructed to pull back and wash at a young age (younger than 11 was the implication). Were they mistaken? Thanks

Not necessarily. As I said a good message would be to instruct the boy that they will eventually need to do this but when they start is when they're ready. The message shouldn't be, "By XX you should be able to do this and that and if not there is a problem." I also wouldn't say 'wash', rinsing is usually more than enough.

ETA: I like Darat's link. It sums it up pretty well.

 

[Minoosh]

This may have come up already - do you want your kid to have a weird wiener that might draw taunts in the boys' locker room? It's one small consideration.

I don't equate it to female circumcision at all. Removal of the clitoris and sometimes scraping away the labia, sewing the vagina closed except for a small opening for menstruation, then cutting the woman open with a knife at marriage is a lot more serious.

One guy I know says he's exquisitely sensitive due to his intact-ness so sex is better. Really that was too much information.

 

[Ryokan]

This may have come up already - do you want your kid to have a weird wiener that might draw taunts in the boys' locker room? It's one small consideration.

Elective surgery on children's bodies to make them fit in? What do you do with children who draw large taunts because they have a big nose or big ears?

And isn't this sort of a vicious circle? Some time ago, circumcision became a fad in the US. And now that the majority are, you have to keep doing it, otherwise those who aren't are seen as 'abnormal'. It's an incredible argument.

Believe me, kids will find something to taunt other kids with with anyway, whether it's that their parents didn't cut of bits of their penis, or big ears, or red hair, or what have you.

I don't equate it to female circumcision at all. Removal of the clitoris and sometimes scraping away the labia, sewing the vagina closed except for a small opening for menstruation, then cutting the woman open with a knife at marriage is a lot more serious.

Perhaps if you informed yourself a little better? Not all female circumcision is as you describe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_circumcision#Types_I_and_II

Type I female circumcision is directly comparable to male circumcision, as it only removes the clitoral hood. Now that you know that, are you still against it?

One guy I know says he's exquisitely sensitive due to his intact-ness so sex is better. Really that was too much information.

Yes, decades of not having the head of the penis chaffing against your underwear will do that.

But if you're too squeamish to discuss the topic, why are you here?

 

[Minoosh]

Elective surgery on children's bodies to make them fit in? What do you do with children who draw large taunts because they have a big nose or big ears?

My concern isn't about "fitting in," exactly. It's more about the kid's well-being. If he liked his big ears, fine. If he came home crying every day, if he's plagued by shame and lack of confidence, I'd give him the choice if it were at all feasible. And BTW I don't agree an uncircumcised penis is "abnormal." I suppose you could put off circumcision and let the kid decide.

I know it would be ideal to persuade the child to ignore teasing and accept himself as he is but that's tough to do.

Believe me, kids will find something to taunt other kids with with anyway, whether it's that their parents didn't cut of bits of their penis, or big ears, or red hair, or what have you.

If I loved my kid and could change a perceived flaw that was making him miserable I'd do it for the confidence he would gain - confidence that might make him less likely to be bullied.

Perhaps if you informed yourself a little better? Not all female circumcision is as you describe.

I didn't say it was. And why the gratuitous dig? I'm curious what people get out of that.

Type I female circumcision is directly comparable to male circumcision, as it only removes the clitoral hood. Now that you know that, are you still against it?

Not necessarily. I don't know the long-term consequences of removing the clitoral hood. Here's a great opportunity to look it up yourself so you can take another jab at me and maybe make yourself feel better.

Yes, decades of not having the head of the penis chaffing against your underwear will do that.

I imagine that would toughen it up pretty good. I'm not "squeamish" about the subject. This coworker brought it up out of nowhere and it wasn't a detail of his life I particularly wanted to know. He seemed really interested in talking about it, and I wasn't.

 

[jdp]

This may have come up already - do you want your kid to have a weird wiener that might draw taunts in the boys' locker room? It's one small consideration.

My concern isn't about "fitting in," exactly. It's more about the kid's well-being. If he liked his big ears, fine. If he came home crying every day, if he's plagued by shame and lack of confidence, I'd give him the choice if it were at all feasible. And BTW I don't agree an uncircumcised penis is "abnormal." I suppose you could put off circumcision and let the kid decide.

I am not sure for a normal body part, as opposed to say a birth defect, this is a reasonable consideration at all. As Ryokan noted, kids will make fun of a child for anything is is/has or is not/has not. It could be their red hair, their freckles, perhaps he is overweight, too thin, too short, too tall, perhaps his parents work in an undesirable profession, or they're poor the list goes on and on forever. His penis will probably be one of the least noticeable traits to be honest. There are better ways to build confidence then to try and carve a child in their peer's image.

I didn't say it was. And why the gratuitous dig? I'm curious what people get out of that.

Actually, the way you wrote it, at the very least you implied that if there were more than one kind they are all then unquestionably worse than male circumcision.

I don't equate it to female circumcision at all. Removal of the clitoris and sometimes scraping away the labia, sewing the vagina closed except for a small opening for menstruation, then cutting the woman open with a knife at marriage is a lot more serious.

The fact is this is not the case. Female circumcision is an umbrella term which actually covers a range of procedures. Some are clearly more damaging than male circumcision while others are much less. Despite the fact that some types of female circumcision are less damaging than male circumcision all forms of it are illegal to perform on a minor absent medical need.

I do equate the two depending on the degree, they are performed for essentially the same reason. What I can't wrap my head around though is why women are protected without regard to the degree, reason, or conditions of a female circumcision but men aren't protected at all.

 

[Prometheus]

I understand the arguments against it, and from a rational standpoint they seem right to me. Nevertheless, I find myself unable to feel more than a slight twinge of guilt about having had my sons cut. I've felt worse about a wide variety of quite minor indiscretions, in fact. I'd say my feeling toward it is about 90% ambivalence and 10% unease. To me, the fact I can easily see how wrong it is while not being able to generate an appropriate emotional response is testament to the power of the cultural inertia involved.

Actually, I'm embarrassed to admit I didn't think about the topic much at all until after my first son was cut. I didn't even realize that I was myself cut until well into adulthood. I'd simply never seen an uncut penis. I vaguely knew that the Jews cut something down there, but I didn't really know what it was, or that I didn't have one. It simply wasn't discussed at all, at any time, during my upbringing. I've never felt any resentment or sense of loss at having been cut myself. Of course I'm aware that I'm missing out on a different experience of sex, but I really don't know what that is, and I can't imagine enjoying sex more than I already do.

When my wife wanted to have our first son cut, I knew it was unnecessary, but I'd never encountered the opinion that it was actually wrong, I went along out of sheer ambivalent complacency. Before my second son was born, I'd already realized that it was wrong, but again I went along with my wife's wish, mainly out of cowardice, this time--I simply didn't want to ever be in the position of explaining to my first son why his brother had something that he did not. And again, I don't feel that bad about it. Even worse, I threw a fit when my wife wanted to have our baby girl's ears pierced. I did not allow it to happen, and I used all the same arguments that anti-circ people use in order to protect my little girl from that barbaric practice. Call me a hypocrite. I'm still not gonna get much worked up about it. I'm a lot more worried about other aspects of parenting.

Maybe they'll resent me for it when they grow up. I hope not. On the other hand, I fully expect, despite my best efforts, to give them plenty of other reasons to resent me anyway.

 

[abaddon]

I just cannot find myself understanding pretty much most of the posts here.

Female genital mutilation is abominable, but male genital mutilation is not.

Are you for real?

 

[pgwenthold]

This may have come up already - do you want your kid to have a weird wiener that might draw taunts in the boys' locker room? It's one small consideration.

Exactly when will this happen?

Most of the time when kids are likely to be doing this, they will be too young to be showering together in the boys locker room. And when they are old enough to be showering in boys locker room, the usual response is going to be, "What are you doing looking at my wiener?"

This is actually a very poor consideration. If the kid gets picked on for having red hair, would you as a parent 1) tell them they are special in the way they are made and the other kids are wrong, or 2) shave it off?

Note that this is even less of an issue than circ because red hair grows back.

 

[truethat]

mutilating your child's genitals for aesthetic purposes is just plain wrong. I have two that are and one that isn't. Not a G-d dang bit of difference at all.

and the "looking at the personables" bit is also a joke. Not once in years has any of them checked out the others and had angst about the "difference"

FYI when girls are in locker rooms, they also don't check out each others vajayjays that I can recall.

 

[jdp]

I understand the arguments against it, and from a rational standpoint they seem right to me. Nevertheless, I find myself unable to feel more than a slight twinge of guilt about having had my sons cut.

...

Maybe they'll resent me for it when they grow up. I hope not. On the other hand, I fully expect, despite my best efforts, to give them plenty of other reasons to resent me anyway.

I think your post is emblematic of how baked into our society this procedure is. As I believe George Bernard Shaw said:

“Custom will reconcile people to any atrocity, and fashion will drive them to acquire any custom.”

My guess would be that your sons would likely not resent you but it would be my hope that they consider the issue more when they have a son. I see this happening more and more because most people now know even long before they have a son that it is unnecessary. As opposed to even 10 years ago, it was more difficult to learn that if you lived in the US where you either thought men were simply born that way or that circumcision was absolutely necessary for their wellbeing.

 

[sloinker]

I am an un-circumsised American born At Stanford medical center in 1960. My mother was something of a hippie before there were hippies and she didn't have any of us boys,(4), circumsised. My father was born in the South in the 1930's and he is also un-circumsised. From a young age I was taught at bathtime to retract the skin and wash the glans with soap and water.
I felt somewhat self conscious as a teen when in the locker room at shower time because I was usually the only one around that was intact. Looking back I probably would have preferred the circumsision in school but as an adult I am glad I am uncut. My only child is female and chances are nearing 100% that I won't have any other offspring. I am still unsure if I was to have a boy what I would have done as far as the circumcision decision.