Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

topic posted Mon, August 27, 2007 - 11:44 AM by  Teresa
With our last baby, we briefly touched on the subject of circumcision. Without ever really getting into the debate, my husband stated his opinion that he should like to have his son circumcised while I said I was against the procedure. It ended up being a non-issue at around 4 months when the ultra-sound revealed we were having a girl.

But since the initial conversation, we've touched on it again in passing. DH forwarded me that article from the New York Times a few months ago "proving" that circumcision helps prevent AIDS and other STDs. Somehow this was supposed to change my mind.

Well, I'm pregnant again. And if this baby is a boy, he will be circ'd over my dead body. Period.

DH says a boy "should look like his father." And "he will get terrorized by his school-mates," and "it's cleaner." My question first is why do so many men champion genital mutilation while so many women oppose it? Weird.

Also, have any of you had to struggle over this issue with your baby daddies? I don't want him to feel like he doesn't have a say in any of this, but if he forced me to send my newborn baby off to have part of his penis ripped off for no reason, I'd never get over it.
posted by:
Teresa
Los Angeles
  • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

    Tue, August 28, 2007 - 12:32 AM
    Getting hassled in the locker room isn't really the issue it once was, with the ratio of circumcised to uncircumcised males running about 50/50 these days. From the History of Circumcision:

    "The ratio of boys circumcised to boys preserved intact continues to decline in America. In 2001, it had further declined to a ratio of 55 percent circumcised, while the percentage of boys preserved intact had risen to 45 percent."

    Where Australia has stood on the matter: In 1996: "... the Australian College of Paediatrics (ACP) reported that the incidence of neonatal circumcision in Australia has continued its decline to 10%. The ACP termed circumcision traumatic, a possible violation of human rights, and called for parents to be provided with full and complete information about circumcision before making a decision."

    Even the well-known Dr. Spock changed his tune about circumcision as time went on:

    The First Edition of Baby and Child Care followed the conventional wisdom on circumcision: he recommended it, although he was not circumcised himself (oddly enough, circumcision of gentile babies had first became fashionable in "Boston Brahmin" families like Spock's). In "The Sixth Edition" (1985) he wrote about circumcising healthy children, "There is no excuse for the operation — except as a religious rite. So I strongly recommend leaving the foreskin alone. Parents should insist on convincing reasons for circumcision — and there are no convincing reasons that I know of." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Spock

    How about this: "Deaths from circumcision and its complications are estimated at 229 per year based on a ratio from a British study."
    www.cirp.org/library/sta...llinger2004/




  • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

    Mon, September 3, 2007 - 7:54 AM
    Teresa, here are some facts you can use about circumcision:

    1.The circumcision rate for the Western US about 40% so he won't get hassled in the locker room because most of the boys will *not* be circumcised.

    2. Since his daddy will be an adult and he will be a child, their penises will look quite different indeed, with or without circumcision.

    3. The #1 way to prevent AIDS and STDs is to practice safe sex and it's a much better bet to educate your son than hope that a bit of foreskin removed from his penis will prevent disease.

    4. What if your son didn't *want* to be circumcised? If he chooses to be circumcised later on, he can always do it, but if he doesn't want it then you can't take it back after the surgery is done.

    I will also say that I did not circumcise my son but struggled over it because I come from a Jewish background. In the end, I decided that if it was his body and I wasn't going to make that decision for him.
  • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

    Tue, September 4, 2007 - 7:27 AM
    Well, if its the article I'm thinking of, its a study that was done in Africa (I believe, but my brain isn't awake yet this morning, someone correct me if its wrong) where HIV/AIDS is RAMPANT. It was a study done on men who have multiple partners, with no condoms/protection, in a country where much of the nation is infected. Safer sex practices are not understood/practiced. And in that case, it makes sense, as the foreskin creates a 'trap' for any virus that would be present more than a circumcised man. (In the same way that women are more vulnerable) So, yes, its probably more LIKELY. It DOES NOT state that circumcised men DO NOT get HIV/AIDS.

    And, in North America, the concern is not the same. Not saying its 100% safe here, of course. But sexual practices - in general - are totally different.

    As far as the looks like his father, ask him to describe his father's penis in detail. And if his friends at school are looking at his penis, its time to switch schools. ;)

    Cleaner...nope. Its no more "dirty" than a woman's vagina. And is self cleaning. All he'll need to "do" is retract and rinse, and by the time that comes, he'll be old enough to do it on his own. My son is 3 and has never once had any kind of infection, UTI, etc. Not saying it NEVER happens, but people make it sound like its a "problem" when its not.

    There's also the argument that there is a higher rate of penile cancer among uncircumcised males - which is true. What they don't say is the "higher rate" is like 1%, and GENERALLY among elderly men, who had multiple parnters, and some forms of STD's as a result.

    OF COURSE, you can have a healthy, uncircumcised son who may have problems, it happens. Just like circumcised boys can have problems as a result of the surgery. There is no absolute guarantee either way. But the arguments that its cleaner, or more 'attractive' (I mean c'mon, the penis in general...not what I'd describe as "pretty" LOL) just bug me.

    Fwiw, my husband is circumcised and my son is NOT. Initially he wanted to, for no other reason that he just thought that's what you do. After we looked into it more, he was middle ground, and I was the one who finally said NO FREAKIN WAY. I showed him some information and he agreed.

    I will say we were surprised to find out that out of our friend's boys 4 out of the 6 are uncircumcised, and one of the circumcised regrets it bc he has problems as a result. We orignailly thought we were the only ones.

    The hard part is finding unbiased information. There are so many websites (on both sides) that are very militant in their views and use outdated or inaccurate information to make their argument. Do some research, ask your OB or pediatrician, try to give him some SOLID information. Its really becoming more common to NOT circumcise, and there's also the issue that a lot of insurance companies no longer cover the procedure as its considered 'cosmetic'.
  • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

    Sun, September 23, 2007 - 1:52 AM
    I'm sorrow but who is making fun of uncut boy in jim class ?

    back win I was in middle school I was 1 of 2 boys in a class over 30 that was not cut
    And I'm shore no one made fun of me.
    But if thay did I think I can get over it,. but I wood never get over a circumcision that will last foerever
    • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

      Thu, October 11, 2007 - 9:38 PM
      I'm lucky, my husband is uncut, so there is no debate. If he wants some of the "medical" persuasion tell him that the American Academy of Pediatrics and the World Health Organization have both stated that circumcision is not a medically necessary procedure and does not keep the penis cleaner. My husband never had any issues being uncircumcised among his peers, and like every one else has said, it is decreasing in popularity but fast. So tell him to get with the times and leave his little man's wee wee alone. Boys are born with a foreskin for a reason!
      • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

        Thu, November 1, 2007 - 3:58 PM
        Well, I did the ultrasound and it told us we're (most likely) having a boy. UGH! So, the debate raged on. I came to my husband armed with tomes of research suggesting that circumcision isn't the best idea. He really had nothing to counter back with except several of his male peers (all in their 40's mind you--I am in my 20's) backing him up.

        Finally, after I broke out into tears at the thought of handing over my beautiful baby boy to have his genitals mutilated for some obscure aesthetic reason (which I do not share), he relented and told me he would leave it up to me to do what's right.

        What sucks is that I honestly find uncut penises much more attractive. The aesthetic thing to me makes no sense. Circumcised penises look naked and wounded to me. How do I tell this to my husband (well I guess I already have)?
        • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

          Thu, November 1, 2007 - 4:13 PM
          You don't tell that little tidbit to your husband!
          I was raised very Jewish, and when I finally starting researching circumcision and bringing it up with some of my Jewish guy friends, I found their reaction very touchy. Most men harbor so much anxiety and uncertainty around their penises to begin with, without worrying about whether or not it has been damaged. I found that men, including my brother, did not like to think that their dicks are lacking in any way. And I think it is better to approach it from a slightly different angle. Basically leave the aesthetics out of it entirely. I also prefer an uncircumcised penis, and my husband is uncut, so I have no problem telling him that. But you will only hurt your husband's feelings if he thinks you find his penis unattractive. Take his offer and run with it, the only thing he is clinging to in the pro vs. con arguments is pride. And again, how his sons penis looks should not be a concern of his or anyone else's. this is not about appearances, it is about newborn babies not experiencing genital trauma in the first hours of life outside of mama.
  • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

    Sun, November 4, 2007 - 3:22 PM
    I don't have children but I do have an opinion. Why circumcise? And we need social change! I don't believe in stepping in line because that is what we have done before or it's "normal", socialy accepted or easy. Change happens now with each choice we make. I believe in a gentail reality for all babies and what is gentail about getting your pinis manipulated.
    Good luck to you and maybe your husband will learn a lot from you and your new son. If it is a boy. Blessings and strength to you.
    • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

      Tue, November 27, 2007 - 2:33 PM
      It's hard not to bring aesthetics into question. My husband and all this friends (who are all around 40 yrs old) argue that a big reason to circumcise is that women find it more attractive. I BEG TO DIFFER!!!! I'm a woman, I've seen both, I like intact. Bleh. This sucks.
      • Re: Circumcision-He's for, I'm against--WWYD?

        Thu, November 29, 2007 - 5:17 PM
        Just came across this:

        The Mind of a Newborn
        Excerpt from The Mind of Your Newborn Baby
        by David B. Chamberlain, Ph.D.
        North Atlantic Books: Berkeley, CA 1998
        10th Anniversary edition of "Babies Remember Birth"
        www.birthpsychology.com/births...t1.html

        Myths about Newborns

        1. Babies Don't Feel
        Some nurses and doctors are still telling parents that babies don't really feel things, that they will not suffer during medical procedures, or miss their mothers if taken away to a nursery. Anesthetics have not been considered necessary for infants undergoing surgery. Hospital delivery rooms, obstetrical instruments, and medical routines were all designed before babies were thought to have senses and thus with no regard for babies' comfort. Rooms are frigid, lights blinding, surfaces hard and flat, the atmosphere noisy, the handling of newborns too upsetting. Newborns are routinely traumatized and punctured.

        Generation after generation, an unlucky majority of American male babies have been subjected to circumcision for dubious medical religious, cultural, and cosmetic reasons. I can only assume that parents have tolerated this in the mistaken belief that the baby will not know he is being tortured. He will.

        Babies considered unable to feel are easily victimized; they become non-persons with minimal rights. An earlier, more deadly, form of this view provided justification for infanticide (mostly female), practiced widely through most of human history. In modern times child abuse, the once secret violence of parents, is exposed to public view. Infants may be the last large category of persons to be fundamentally misunderstood, discriminated against, and abused.

        In 1975 French obstetrician Frederick Leboyer called for a new approach in Birth Without Violence. His colleagues denied the need for change and publicly recited the myth that babies do not really feel or care. The newly discovered truth is that newborn babies have all their senses and make use of them just as the rest of us do. Their cries of pain are authentic. Babies are not unfeeling; it is we who have been unfeeling.

Recent topics in "Birth As a Rite Of Passage"