circumcision...ugh

[smy3th]

I was afraid this was going to turn into another one of those circ-bashing threads, and sure enough. There seem to be some people that have an absolute obsession on this subject. It becomes a holy religious cause to preach to the world about the horrors of circumcision. I'm not quite sure what drives them in their crusade. I think there are lots more important things to worry about. For example, how about putting that much time and energy into campaigning against these fucking idiots that talk on their cell-phones while driving? They do the world a billion times more harm than circumcision. I'd like to "cut off" a few of those cell drivers. It used to be, if anyone drove half that badly, they'd get arrested for drunk driving and get their license suspended. Now every third driver on the road is DUI of a cell-phone, and there's no law against it. I think half the accidents now are related to phone usage.

Find a cause that actually matters.

And don't bother with your horror stories. Anyone who has been here for more than a couple of weeks has seen all that stuff ad nauseum.

 

[1hotbabe]

an uncut penis is unhealthy and unattractive

i'm his mother, i can make that decision...he's having it done, no questions asked...and he'll be glad for it, trust me, i'm a woman, i know these things....think about it...kids start petting in their teens and american teenage girls ....well, let's just say they'd react to an uncut penis in a way that could cause insecurity and social rejection....which is a whole hell of a lot more painful and remembered than a circumcision at birth

i just feel sad it's gonna hurt....but i don't feel guilty in a sense that i'm second guessing my decision or even think it's a bad one

I agree with this! It is your decision! And, I think it is in poor taste to come in here and make disparaging remarks against circumsion uncalled for. But, that's my opinion which doesn't count for much! But, I have to say in the grand scheme of things as an adult male (and mean no offense to uncut men) but, a circumsized penis is so much more attractive! *nods*

 

[EarnestImp]

I was afraid this was going to turn into another one of those circ-bashing threads, and sure enough. There seem to be some people that have an absolute obsession on this subject.

I feel the same way...but the absolute obsession is by those who would subject a child to unanethetised surgery for the sake of an aesthetic preference born of Victorian anti-masturbatory hysteria. Intactness is normal, and circumcision is, in essence, a socially accepted amputation fetish. I can't understand people who don't just say 'OK, it isn't necessary, so we won't do it. We'll save a few bucks, and the kid won't suffer'.

 

[thegirlfriday11]

"Unhealthy" is bullshit. There is no major medical organization in the world that says that circ is on balance medically necessary or strongly indicated. Look here for statements by medical organizations.

from the American Academy of Family Physicians
http://familydoctor.org/042.xml

A recent AAP report stated that circumcision does offer some benefit in preventing urinary tract infections in infants. Circumcision also offers some benefit in preventing penile cancer in adult men. However, this disease is very rare in all men, whether or not they have been circumcised. Circumcision may reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases.


from the American Urological Association
http://www.urologyhealth.org/pediatric/index.cfm?cat=10&topic=350

Properly performed neonatal circumcision prevents phimosis, paraphimosis and balanoposthitis, and is associated with a decreased incidence of cancer of the penis among U.S. males. In addition, there is a connection between the foreskin and urinary tract infections in the neonate. For the first three to six months of life, the incidence of urinary tract infections is at least ten times higher in uncircumcised than circumcised boys. Evidence associating circumcision with reduced incidence of sexually transmitted diseases is conflicting. Circumcision may be required in a small number of uncircumcised boys when phimosis, paraphimosis or recurrent balanoposthitis occur and may be requested for ethnic and cultural reasons after the newborn period. Circumcision in these children usually requires general anesthesia.


http://patients.uptodate.com/topic.asp?file=pregnan/4822&title=Circumcision
BENEFITS OF CIRCUMCISION — There are several benefits to newborn circumcision.

Reduction in urinary tract infection — Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are uncommon in males; the greatest risk is in male infants less than one year old. All studies have shown that uncircumcised boys have an increased risk of UTI. A UTI in an infant may require invasive tests or hospitalization, and may lead to kidney infection. Although uncircumcised boys appear to be at a higher risk, UTI is uncommon in both circumcised and uncircumcised newborn boys.

Cancer — Cancer of the penis is rare, but uncircumcised men appear to be at an increased risk for developing the disease. In addition, cervical cancer may be more common in women whose male sexual partners are not circumcised.

Penile problems — Uncircumcised males may be at increased risk for inflammation of the opening at the tip of the penis or of the glans itself, although these problems can occur in either circumcised or uncircumcised men.

Infection — Studies suggest that circumcision helps decrease the risk of acquiring some sexually transmitted diseases (STD), such as syphilis, gonorrhea, herpes simplex, and HIV. It is important to note, however, that many circumcised men acquire these diseases. Circumcision may lower the risk of acquiring a STD, but it does not eliminate it.

Hygiene — In the uncircumcised male, the space between the foreskin and the glans must be cleaned regularly. Proponents of circumcision argue that it is difficult for uncircumcised boys and men to maintain proper hygiene; it has been suggested that poor hygiene may be related to the increased risk of cancer or other problems seen in this group, though this theory has not been well studied.

"As for unattractive, that is a matter of personal opinion. And 1/3 of US babies are not circed nowadays. So US women will be used to intact men.

and it's my personal opinion that it's unattractive and my son will be having it done, it's my decision
and what is the ethnic background of the 1/3 of those american babies?

Then why don't you INSIST on a local nerve block anesthetic? Why don't you have it done by a spcialist if the hospital won't give a block? Why do you complain about it being painful when you are doing nothing to alleviate the pain? A nerve block is a well established procedure. Performing genital surgery on an infant without anesthesia is just cruel, and the pain is un-necessary.

and i don't believe that a nerve block on a newborn is a good idea

a local anesthetic is sufficient...i do have a medical background and have delivered babies and have seen circumcisions performed live and have 4 younger brothers who are circumcised, well adjusted, and as far as i know, have never had a problem with mom making that decision

 

[smy3th]

I feel the same way..

No you don't. You feel the opposite way, or you wouldn't have posted yet another anti-circ rant, and then another, and then another. You are obsessed. You are so obsessed, that you are unable to recognize that you have an obsession.

People do it. You don't think they should. We heard you. Thank you for sharing. They have lots of different reasons, none of which you agree with, but they didn't ask you.

More children will be killed on the way home from the hospital by drivers distracted by cell phones than will be seriously harmed by circumcision. That's my obsession. I am absolutely outraged! I am ready to start ramming those fuckwits. And none of them are saying anything even half way intelligent on those cell phones. I know that for sure, because I can tell by their driving that they are incapable of being half way intelligent.

 

[EarnestImp]

from the American Academy of Family Physicians
http://familydoctor.org/042.xmlA recent AAP report stated that circumcision does offer some benefit in preventing urinary tract infections in infants. ....

Yes, yes, but the position papers argue that there is not a medically compelling net benefit to circumcision. For example you have to perform surgery on 200 infants to prevent one urinary tract infection, which would ordinarily be treated with antibiotics. Yes, there are some benefits, and the surgery has some risks, but there is not an overall benefit that would justify the procedure.

The American Academy of Pediatrics position paper says: Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficent to recommend routine neonatal circumcision.

 

[dolf]

just curious...again...what are the infection risks statistically?

i'd be worried about it dropping off

 

[thegirlfriday11]

Yes, yes, but the position papers argue that there is not a medically compelling net benefit to circumcision. For example you have to perform surgery on 200 infants to prevent one urinary tract infection, which would ordinarily be treated with antibiotics. Yes, there are some benefits, and the surgery has some risks, but there is not an overall benefit that would justify the procedure.

The American Academy of Pediatrics position paper says: Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficent to recommend routine neonatal circumcision.

if a newborn is at a greater risk for UTI's and kidney problems due to uncircumcision, then the benefit of the circumcision is greater

and your personal opinion of what i should do with my child really makes no difference in the world, so go be dramatic to someone who's interested in the drama

 

[1hotbabe]

girlfriday, this is totally off the subject, but I am guessing after you have your son you will be changing your AV. So, before you do I just want to say I have so enjoyed it. There is something so sweet about seeing that tiny little foot imprint. It always makes me smile. You are now returned to your regular topic of discussion!

 

[thegirlfriday11]

girlfriday, this is totally off the subject, but I am guessing after you have your son you will be changing your AV. So, before you do I just want to say I have so enjoyed it. There is something so sweet about seeing that tiny little foot imprint. It always makes me smile. You are now returned to your regular topic of discussion!

aww...thanks

 

[EarnestImp]

and i don't believe that a nerve block on a newborn is a good idea ... a local anesthetic is sufficient...i do have a medical background and have delivered babies and have seen circumcisions performed live and have 4 younger brothers who are circumcised, well adjusted, and as far as i know, have never had a problem with mom making that decision

Generally, anesthetics are not used at all, according to the AMA position statement at the location I posted.

Local application of EMLA cream is generally ineffective - look here: http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/taddio2/

Circ without local anesthesia or with EMLA produces a long-term and perhaps permanent change in pain response. This is a scientific fact. See the last ref above.

Nerve blocks are generally used with success. Look here (references included) http://www.postgradmed.com/issues/1999/07_99/mattson.htm
so I think you are incorrect when it comes to nerve blocks.

 

[EarnestImp]

just curious...again...what are the infection risks statistically?
i'd be worried about it dropping off

The risk of a UTI in a male infant is under 1%. Circumcision reduces this, according to some studies. Other studies claim that there is a benefit from circ only valid when congenital abnormalities are present. When a UTI happens, it is generally treatable with antibiotics, though in rare cases it can lead to renal scarring. However, UTIs are in general more common in females anyway.

 

[thegirlfriday11]

Generally, anesthetics are not used at all, according to the AMA position statement at the location I posted.

Local application of EMLA cream is generally ineffective - look here: http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/taddio2/

Circ without local anesthesia or with EMLA produces a long-term and perhaps permanent change in pain response. This is a scientific fact. See the last ref above.

Nerve blocks are generally used with success. Look here (references included) http://www.postgradmed.com/issues/1999/07_99/mattson.htm
so I think you are incorrect when it comes to nerve blocks.

and the AMA isn't performing my son's circumcision

i don't need to see your hysterical refs, i've already made my decision, the only decision i haven't made is whether it will be done on the first or second day

like i said, save your refs for someone who's interested or who hasn't been educated on the subject

 

[EarnestImp]

if a newborn is at a greater risk for UTI's and kidney problems due to uncircumcision, then the benefit of the circumcision is greater

Look, you're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. UTIs occur in well under 1% of infants, and when they do occur they are treatable, with renal problems being a very rare complication. Don't rationalize a personal preference. You can argue all you want, but there seems to be no medical society position paper that claims a significant overall advantage to circ, in terms of benefits versus risks.

 

[dolf]

The risk of a UTI in a male infant is under 1%. Circumcision reduces this, according to some studies. Other studies claim that there is a benefit from circ only valid when congenital abnormalities are present. When a UTI happens, it is generally treatable with antibiotics, though in rare cases it can lead to renal scarring. However, UTIs are in general more common in females anyway.

no silly

i meant infection to the circumcision wound...it's in daipers and gets covered in poop several times a day.

 

[EarnestImp]

i don't need to see your hysterical refs, i've already made my decision, the only decision i haven't made is whether it will be done on the first or second day

Then why do you keep responding?

You have demonstrated yourself medically ignorant on several points:

1) you claim that nerve blocks are not appropriate, yet the literature (see my cites) is filled with successful use of nerve blocks to dull the pain of neonate circ.

2) you claim an overall medical benefit for circ, yet no medical society position paper agrees with you.

Like I said, you are entitled to any opinion you want (as am I), but you are not entitled to your own version of the facts, particularly when they contradict the published literature.

 

[EarnestImp]

no silly ..... i meant infection to the circumcision wound...it's in daipers and gets covered in poop several times a day.

According to the AMA position statement, the incidence is "unknown" but some papers estimate 0.4%. As far as I can tell, no one keeps track, except when some royal screwup happens, like an amputation.

 

[dolf]

According to the AMA position statement, the incidence is "unknown" but some papers estimate 0.4%. As far as I can tell, no one keeps track, except when some royal screwup happens, like an amputation.

ew, i heard about that once...poor guy

 

[1hotbabe]

EarnestImp, if you didn't notice the topic of the thread was whether or not girlfriday wanted to have circumsion performed the 1st or 2nd day of birth. Not, whether or not to have circumsion. I am not trying to speak for girlfriday but seeing as to how I am reading this, I too have an opinion. I for one find your comment asking her why she keeps responding hysterical as this IS her thread so she can if she pleases. If you want to ask that question start your own thread and ITS topic can be pro or con circumcision.

 

[dolf]

EarnestImp, if you didn't notice the topic of the thread was whether or not girlfriday wanted to have circumsion performed the 1st or 2nd day of birth. Not, whether or not to have circumsion. I am not trying to speak for girlfriday but seeing as to how I am reading this, I too have an opinion. I for one find your comment asking her why she keeps responding hysterical as this IS her thread so she can if she pleases. If you want to ask that question start your own thread and ITS topic can be pro or con circumcision.

i've done it for him

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?p=12357318#post12357318

i'm helpful that way.

 

[rakastuja]

an uncut penis is unhealthy and unattractive

Weird.

I have never seen cut penis irl. I think here you get cut about only for religious reason. I dont believe health is any issue. All men I have met have known how to wash it anyway.

And what comes to attractiveness... if you pull foreskin back it looks like cut one. I think a penis with foreskin is way more intrigueing.

I guess its your decidion though in my opinion it might be something to leave for everyone to decide themselves... I get kind of disturbed by that "unattractive" comment though...

 

[EarnestImp]

If you want to ask that question start your own thread and ITS topic can be pro or con circumcision.

Hey, people start threads, they don't own 'em. If she doesn't like my responses, she can ignore them, rather than telling me that she is ignoring them. I congratulate you on finally spelling 'circumcision' correctly, however. On one of your two attempts, at least. For some reason, there seems to be an inverse correlation between supporting the practice and actually being able to spell the word.

 

[1hotbabe]

*yawn*

 

[dolf]

Hey, people start threads, they don't own 'em. If she doesn't like my responses, she can ignore them, rather than telling me that she is ignoring them. I congratulate you on finally spelling 'circumcision' correctly, however. On one of your two attempts, at least. For some reason, there seems to be an inverse correlation between supporting the practice and actually being able to spell the word.

i made you your own thread and you dodn't say ta...i'm upset now

 

[EarnestImp]

I guess its your decidion though in my opinion it might be something to leave for everyone to decide themselves... I get kind of disturbed by that "unattractive" comment though...

Exactly. It is a weird American fetish (Canadian, too, but to a lesser extent).

Of course, Americans would go apeshit if someone were to trim back a girl's labia because they are 'unattractive' - in fact, it would get you 5 years in jail here. Oops, I think I just said something obsessive!

Thank God for sensible Euro-chicks.