How do you feel about circumcision?

Question

yes, no -why ?

Answer 1

I think that if God was really adamant in not wanting boys to have f******n, then he wouldn't make them a part of a natural male anatomy.  

Answer 2

yes. my son is being circumsized when hes 6 mos. we had some difficulty when he was born so we have to wait but we deff are having it done  

Answer 3

I am 100% against it and would like to see it made illegal except for cases of true medical need.  It's unnecessary, painful, risky surgery performed on a newborn baby.  How is that possibly a good thing?

The odds of a guy having to have it done later is VERY small  (truly necessary circ rates are less than 1/10,000!)  Most of the problems that men in this country have stems from the bad advice their parent were given, which is to retract and clean under the f******n from birth.  In a small boy, the f******n is fused to the p***s with the same tissue that connects your fingernail to your finger.  And if you ripped up your fingernails over & over to clean underneath, youd probably get some pretty bad infections too!  Not to mention the pain! (They have to rip this apart during the circumcision, before they can clamp, crush and cut off the f******n).  Also, their is a PH balance & natural flora under the f******n, just like there is in the v****a, and overzealous cleaning disrupts that.

  Most of the men in the world have their foreskins, and they don't seem to have all of these awful problems that guys in the US have....it's just that doctors and parents in the US don't know anything about it.  It's super easy, requires no special care, and does serve a purpose, so why remove it?

It is also very easy to take care of.  The f******n of a boy should never, ever be retracted by anyone other than the boy himself.  You just wipe the outside like a finger, during diaper changes and baths.  That's it.  Easy, and much better than having an open wound in a dirty & wet diaper!  Once the boy starts to retract his own f******n, he should wash it in the shower by retracting and washing gently with water & maybe some mild soap.  There is NOTHING complicated about it.

With the rates at about 50% now in the US, the odds of anyone getting made fun of is very small (not that I think conformity should play a role in the decision)  And since the rate is going down, it's very possible that it will be the cut boys who will be the minority pretty soon.

Little boys deserve the same protection as little girls - they all deserve the right to the perfect body they were born with.  Routine circumcision should be outlawed, it is absolutely a terrible thing to do to a baby who just entered the world.

EDIT - I should add that I have nothing against circumcision for an adult who can give informed consent and make the decision for themselves.  I am only talking about circumcising infants or children....

Answer 4

It shouldn't be done to infants, there's no good reason for it. Most countries don't do it. f******n problems are rare and easily treated and it's a very sensitive and important part of the p***s so it shouldn't be cut off before any problems arise. I wouldn't do it if I had a son.

Harriet

Answer 5

I say yes. Boys are more likely to get yeast infections if they are not. When they are older they are more likely to give a girl an infection b/c the extra skin holds bacteria

Answer 6

I think it's a really bad idea for newborn babies. Here is a mothers perspective on circumcision.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Puz7dA7qo...

Answer 7

yes.  my son was circumcised when he was born.  its better to do it when they won't remember it then when they are older and getting infections and have to have it done.  the healing time is alot longer and men are babies!  however, if the father is not circumcised you should speak to him on how he feels.  sometimes its best for your son to see that he is just like daddy...

Answer 8

There's no good reason for it.

Answer 9

Yes it is nasty not to. They are more pron to infections and if not cleaned properly the will have a smell.  

Answer 10

I am completely against it for many many reasons.  Too many to put here.

I find it sickening that people are willing to cut off part of their sons p***s so it looks nice or so it can look like daddys.  I'm sorry but Daddy has pubic hair or does he shave bald so his son will not feel "wierd).

I also do not think any parent should have the right to remove a HEALTHY NORMAL part of their sons body w/o his permission.

I have a happy, healthy 20 month old with his f******n btw.

JILLY next time you have a yeast infection would you be willing to have some of your body cut off?  If a man does get a yeast infection it can be treated similar to a woman.

Answer 11

110% IN FAVOR...

http://www.circumcisioninfo.com/circ_med...

Answer 12

No. It's an antiquated practice. Sure, there is a possibility of infection, but there is also the chance of infection if a baby girl gets f***s inside her v****a, so what are you going to do about that??  Oh, I have an idea, keep them clean. I have five family members (no pun intended) who are not circumcised, and have had no problem whatsoever. And I chose not to circumcise my son (my husband is circumcised) How weird to think that your sons p***s has to look like your husbands. I wonder if my daughter and I should compare vaginas.

So bring on the thumbs down, it's my opinion and i am entitled.

Answer 13

i agree with this:

"Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision."

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi...

Answer 14

i plan to keep my son pretty clean so we opted out of it, there is no good reason to cut a little boys p***s. its sick really, maybe it's so every boy thats born means that much more money for dr.'s.

Answer 15

It's a horrible mutilation that I resent deeply. It should be illegal for boys, just like it is for girls. It's also apalling some of the vacuous reasons parents give to justify their decision to do this irreversable surgery on their sons.

Male circumcision is the amputation of the f******n, not extra skin but an integral part of the p***s; measuring 15 square inches in an adult and accounting for over half the penile skin, lots of specialised nerve endings and the most sensitive parts of the p***s.

Not one medical organisation in the world recommends routine infant circumcision anymore but the US is the last western nation still doing this to about 50% of its newborn males. They still don't generally use anaesthetic either. It's child abuse, pure and simple.

The p***s forms as one organ and at birth the f******n is usually fused to the glans like a fingernail to its finger. So there is no cavity for germs and dirt to collect in until it separates naturally later; sometimes not till puberty or later. Only the boy himself should retract it and then he can be taught to skin back and rinse with plain water regularly.

Misguided attempts to retract too early, often by doctors and nurses, are the main cause of damage to boys’ foreskins and the real main reason for childhood circumcisions.

To perform a neo-natal circumcision the circumciser has to rip the f******n away from the glans with forceps. Then the f******n is either cut away or clamped until it falls off. Both methods cause the baby extreme pain and his raw glans and wound sting every time he urinates. It's quite common for the raw edges of the cut f******n to fuse to the raw glans during the healing process, forming skin bridges or tags. These complications and other more serious ones are often not found till puberty and do not show up in complication statistics.

More serious complications, though not common are immediate. Some babies lose their p***s to infection, bleed profusely (often because they are haemophiliac) or even die each year.  

The claimed benefits of circumcision are a beat up (based on flawed studies) and don't really exist but medical authorities have worked out that the overall complication rate is higher than all the benefits claimed by the pro-cutting advocates. One by one the claims are disproved but the pro-cutting zealots come up with more and keep quoting the old ones despite the evidence against them. For example you have more chance of dying from a circumcision or losing your p***s from infection than from penile cancer. The rate of penile cancer is higher in the largely-circumcised USA than in European countries where less than 1% of the male population is circumcised. Plus circumcised men have been found to have penile cancer, mostly on the scar. (Remember this is a very rare disease in intact or circumcised men).

A very recent study in New Zealand followed a cohort of boys through life from birth to age 32. About 40% were circumcised. The intact males had a slightly lower rate of sexually transmitted infections than the circumcised but there was no significant difference.

Using surgery to mutilate the genitals instead of washing in a modern western society makes no sense. Normal intact male genitals are, if anything, easier to wash than female ones and the same substance, smegma collects in the genital folds of both sexes. A few intact males have problems with tight f******n but this is only a tiny proportion of intact males. The condition can now be almost always treated with simple stretching exercises, sometimes in combination with a steroid cream that speeds up the process. However doctors who do not value the preservation of the f******n often still trot out circumcision as a first-option treatment in the US and even some other countries.

I am circumcised and hate it. I wish I'd been given the chance to choose for myself. Intact men can choose to get cut at any time in their life, though most have no desire to do so. The internet has shown that many men resent being circumcised. It's just not something that most of us talk about a lot, even to our parents.

Answer 16

I am for it. Reasons being the following;

1.) I am religious

2.) I feel it's important to have the son the same as the father, as it will be easier to take care of.

3.) It's more hygienic

It's something that has been done for years and I do not consider it mutilation or harming the child or child abuse as many have suggested on this forum.

Answer 17

I left the decision up to my son's father and he decided for it. It was one little snip the day after he was born and he was back in my arms in no time. Although I imagine it must have hurt- im not gonna lie, the sight of his poor little p***s made me want to cry when i saw it, he was fine an hour later, sleeping nice and contently. It was healed in a week, all that was needed to do was put a ton of vaseline on it and wrap gauze around it so that the diaper would not irritate him. When I asked my boyfriend why he chose to circumcise him, he said because of the cleanliness issue and that many people he knew had it done and the few that didnt were ridiculed in school. That and the fact that it would hurt later on in life a lot more if he chose to do it on his own.

Answer 18

Both my boys are circumcised. We did it for our own reasons. I understand both sides of it but each parent is going to do what they feel is right.  

Answer 19

I had my son circumcised. I had been unsure about what I would do until I talked to one of my mom's friends. She had 2 sons from her 1st marriage and neither were circumcised (the father had said no) Well they both had problems and both had to be circumcised when they were  teenagers. She said they were in horrible pain from it. Obviously that won't happen to everyone but it certainly made me decide to just go ahead and do it.