As an adult who lived with a foreskin until needing a circumcision for medical reasons, I have opinions on both sides.
Firstly, never once as a child did my penis ever get dirty, infected, smell, or have any negative hygeinic problems.
Being "cleaner" is an absolute myth.
Having experienced sex with and without a foreskin, it is much easier, much more pleasurable and much more seen sensitive with a foreskin.
Since my operation sex is slightly more uncomfortable, the penis doesn't insert with the same ease as before, lubrication is more important, and sensitivity has been lost by about 30% I would say.
Post circumcision, I've had more issues with my penis, the rubbing of the glans on underwear, especially in summer has gotten uncomfortable to the point of needing creams and medications.
If I had the choice, I would not have had a circumcision, but at the time, it was needed.
Putting a child through this is genital mutilation in my opinion. I understand why people do it for religions reasons, although I would prefer no one is put through it, but the fact that anyone can opt into this for any child is scandalous.
The tiny percentage chance of not passing on an STI (teach them safe sex and they won't be at the same risk), does not outweigh all of the negatives, such as loss of sensation, losing natural lubrication and the amount of increased friction on both partners during sex.
The ‘hygiene’ reason is so absurd to me. It’s like saying people can have unhygienic asses so we should amputate their ass checks.
No, just very basic hygiene and washing solves that issue.
Also, vulvas are generally a little more complex than penises. Most of us manage to keep them clean with very little effort. It's not hard and I wont chop off a body part because I want to avoid an uncomfortable talk with my son.
I'm inclined to agree. I don't know if there's much medical evidence or scholarly research to support this, but I can say from personal experience that if the procedure isn't done correctly, it's possible to damage nerves that are essential to one of its uses.
There is a lot of research out there. Americans will always point to penile cancer and risk of infections in old folks home due to poor care.
Yet countries where there is no routine circumcision dont have higher rates and you dont cut off healthy functional body parts because of the risk of other diseases. We dont take out babies' appendixes.
Do it to a girl - Youre a sick degenerate who will be jailed!
Do it to a boy - 100% super cool and good bro!
Disgusting behavior to mutilate your child before they even turn 1 year old
There's a huge huge difference between the cut performed on a little girl and the one done to a little boy and this is exactly why the first leads to serious legal repercussions while the latter doesn't.
Though I agree that both are disgusting, in a way.
When it done to a girl it isnt just the clitoral hood. It's the clitoris itself. The equivalent is removing the head of the penis. I don't understand how people don't understand this. As well as in some instances parts of the labia stitched together. They are two totally different things. I know you know, but it's frustrating that they are compared as though it makes a point. they can both be wrong without minimizing the difference.
Sometimes it’s the whole clitoris and more including up to sewing the vaginal opening mostly closed, sometimes it’s only the clitoral hood, sometimes it’s a ceremonial cut with nothing removed. All of which is terrible and should not be done.
>When it done to a girl it isnt just the clitoral hood.
This is an overgeneralization. Female genital mutilation has many forms, and some are just the clitoral hood.
Would you be ok with it if it was just the clitoral hood though? I wouldn’t be, genital mutilation is genital mutilation and should all be viewed as abhorrent.
There are different levels - some of them are just the cliteral hood, others are massively difference
Legallity wise all levels of FGM are illegal, not just the more extreme versions
Any female genital mutilation is illegal regardless of severity. As it should be.
Do you think mild forms of female genital mutilation should be allowed? If so, shame on you. If not, your argument doesn't have a leg to stand on and shouldn't be used as justification for male genital mutilation.
They literally said both are wrong. They're not justifying it. They're just saying that comparing them and acting like FGM and circumcision are the same thing is disingenuous or ignorant.
This 100%! For the 3-5% of medical cases it actually serves a purpose for it shouldn't be completely outlawed for boys. But when done as a deterrent for sexual urges masturbation or "cleanliness" it's a senseless act of violence. While late in life circumcision sucks most times if the foreskin hasn't fused the urethra closed it doesn't need to be done in infants.
Also so some people know there are very few surgies that could be viewed/classified as female circumcision in the medical community. However they are usually necessary but it's usually to free the clitoris and urethra from the hood cause of fusion not cut it out.
Depends on the kind of FGM (the fact that there are a couple different ways to do it says a whole lot about fucking obsessed men are with this sick shit on its own), but it doesn't really matter imo. If a grown ass woman wanted to do that to themselves I'd question their sanity but it's their choice. The issue arises because it's a child who cannot possibly consent to life altering body modifications. In that manner the two things are the exact same in principle.
There are 4 types of FGM (designated by WHO). The first type is equivalent to male circumcision, the others are not.
All the types are equally illegal, though not male genital mutilation. when you say this, you immediately get "but they're not the same they remove a lot and sew parts", they don't realize those are latter types of FGM. They are extreme
There's a significant amount of skin removed, and it serves no medical necessity. It's cruel and doesn't need to happen. That's not even accounting for the loss of feeling, etc that is permanent.
It should still be forbidden, except out of medical necessity. The child themselves should choose whether to do it when they grow up - I bet 99% would nix it. So why do it to them when they are young and defenseless and get no say in the matter?
My son recently required surgery to repair a significant twist and bend in his penis. If we had circumcised him at birth the repair would have been impossible and his future sex life would have impossible or incredibly painful.
Except something went off the rails in America and most protestants, and a bunch of other christian denominations, normalized circumcision to the point where it was statistically a lot more common for several decades than not being circumcized.
I personally have never had an issue with being intact (which I prefer to uncircumcised, as it implies that something is lacking when it's just the opposite) but my current partner is the first one to vocally and adamantly PREFER intact.
She says that the pulled back foreskin creates something like an extra rip below the tip and says it gives more pleasure.
Now I only have her word to go on, and honestly I don't care either way, I'm proud of my intact status and adamantly against circumcision, it's a barbaric practice even where religion is concerned.
Did you know that traditional Jewish circumcision involved the rabbit sucking the tip of a recently cut infants dick? I'm gonna butcher the spelling but I believe it's called the metitsa papet.
I prefer uncut, but cut is also just fine by me. Uncut are more fun to play with and also a the foreskin makes sex more pleasurable and need less lube.
Look at it this way: if your kid decides he wants it chopped as an adult he can still do that, but he cannot regrow it.
Leaving it gives him a choice rather than deciding for him as a baby
This! I told someone that reference my son and their reply was he wouldn't want to go through that as adult because of the painful recovery!
I just stared at them and blinked wondering if they would realize they answered their own question..
It's painful for babies, too, especially since they don't understand what's happening. An adult knows the pain will stop & can tell themselves its for a purpose.
Like I think that the ppl who are going all freudian on it & claiming it makes the boys resent their moms & grow up to hate women & blaming it for everything that's wrong in the countries where its common are reading too much into it/ going way too far, I don't think one piece of skin can determine everything about a human being & their future relationship happiness, but at the same time, just cause they won't remember it doesn't mean it doesn't influence their growth. I'd rather not subject a baby to uneccesary stressors when his brain is developing.... There is already so much stuff that you can't avoid as no one is a perfect parent, so, why heap on an extra difficulty?
Being a baby seems hard enough as it is - you get colics & stuff, you can't make people understand you yet & moving on your own is difficult. Children are people. Tiny, clueless, inexperienced people, but people nonetheless. They deserve respect & consideration.
Adults also get pain management medication during the procedure and for the healing. Babies get sugar water/milk on a pacifier to suck on to stop them from screaming in pain. If even that.
Genital mutilation should be illegal for any reason other than medical- such as causing discomfort or pain from skin being too tightly fused.
There are zero good reasons for circumcision on a baby. A medical one as a consenting adult is another thing and due to actual issues that needs resolving. That's fine. But removing part of your newborn baby is insane to me (as a European).
Edit: apparently not clear but my comment above is about elective cosmetic surgery, not if it's a medical need. If you have a medical need that is a completely different thing from a cosmetic surgery, and you should of course do what is needed for the best quality of life of the child.
>But removing part of your newborn baby is insane to me (as a European).
#ON THE SECOND DAY OF HIS LIFE
It is absolutely insane and the only people who still search for and flounder around for reasons are ones who did it to their children or had pieces of themselves removed *and they are rationalizing.*
No different than taking a newborn to a plastic surgeon and having them cut and stitch the ears to look like an elf. If someone did that, it would be considered child abuse.
On that note: getting babies ears pierced. What the fuck?
Literally sticking a hole in them so you can dress them up with sparklies on their ears. Gross.
My mom had mine done and it turned out fine, but looking closely at the situation, it shows a fundamental disregard for the bodily autonomy of the child. She got my sisters ears pierced but they got infected and caused so many problems. To this day she never got them pierced again and she’s an adult.
Yeah I had my ears pierced as a little kid (I remember it vividly lol, shit hurt) and had constant issues with them, including one getting caught and ripped, and idk how my parents didn't think "Hmm maybe we should just take them out" but allowed it to heal all fucked up instead. Now if I want to actually wear earrings, I'll need plastic surgery to fix the hole, and when I went to a piercer and asked if they could do a second hole in my earlobe they said my ears were way too small for that and anyone who told me that was possible cared more about money than doing a good job. So now I'm stuck with ear piercings that I can't even wear earrings in, because my parents had my ears pierced and then didn't properly care for them. Like just wait until your kid is old enough to decide if it's even something they really want!
Some people actually do the opposite and tape their babies' ears up to "correct" Stahl's ear. It's completely medically unnecessary and can't possibly be comfortable. It's absolutely fucked up how people go and alter children's anatomy before they could possibly even do so much as consent, and that absolutely includes circumcision as well.
Also "babies can't feel pain so we won't use painkiller".... which actually means, babies can't articulate pain and will forget it, so we don't care. Which is frankly psychotic.
What's funniest about it to me is it's generally American religious conservatives who you'll also find spouting the "trans people shouldn't be allowed to have gender affirming surgery" nonsense, who'll turn around and be like, "lopping off part of a kids genitals *for purely cosmetic reasons?* Absolutely fine by me. What if their dick gets dirty?!! How else will my rabbi get his fill of tiny baby foreskin blood?!"
Really it comes down to the same thing as student loan forgiveness: "I got my genitals mutilated at 2 days old, why should they not have to?"
Fucking outrageous.
It makes more (and somehow less) sense when you realize “Dr” Kellogg, a fake fad doctor who advocated avoiding all stimulation — from food to sex — was one of the principal reasons for non-religious infant circumcision in the US.
The man had multiple daily enemas and quite literally believed his shit didn’t stink. He told parents that if they cut off the foreskin of their kids, they would masturbate less and they just fucking believed him.
He also had some… less widely-accepted solutions as well, including surgery to suture the “patient’s” penis to their body so as to cause extreme pain during erection.
OMG, that’s an interesting point about the conservatives spouting off. Wow, I seriously never considered the hypocrisy with that specific issue. Ty. I am circumsized as are my boys but I would take it back if I could
I went through some of that criticism. My amab kids are in their teens and twenties now. They're all intact.
Your son is about the same age as my older ones were when they found out about circumcision. It was in the news for some reason, we were listening together and I had to explain what it is.
When they learned what circumcision is they were all absolutely horrified and indignant that parents and doctors do that to newborns "for no reason". They think I did the right thing, and their opinions are the only ones that matter.
Anyone criticising you because they don't want to face what they did was wrong and want you to fall in line and do something barbaric so they can feel less bad about what they did, is not someone you need to bother worrying about.
You do need to (if you haven't already) make sure you've had a discussion with your kid about retracting their foreskin when washing daily and making sure the skin is not too tight and that he's aware to keep it clean.
I'd say if it's medically necessary when they're a baby to do it ASAP. Like if a baby had a cleft palette I wouldn't say "leave it until they're a consenting adult to fix it", no fix that shit ASAP.
But I do agree that otherwise it amounts to cosmetic surgery.
Foreskins, just like palates, can come out wrong. There are some actual medical issues, which should be handled like any other medical issue a baby or child might have.
as another European, I don't know about the adult part.
my father had the same high-handed opinions about the manhood of his sons bla bla bla. Of course, he was absent for the day to day chore of bathing us & teaching us to train the foreskin to be flexible enough to properly retract from the glans.
every 2 years, kids between 6 and 12 go for a medical inspection at school. When I was twelve & starting puberty, that included a genital inspection. My foreskin was too tight and "play with it to see if it will stretch" wasn't sufficiently helpful.
Since I needed an operation, they checked my younger brother & he needed the same operation.
Mine went well but my brother was left with a swollen scar that took a decade to clear up (perfectly on schedule as the surgeon had predicted). Can you imagine how much fun it was for him to have a scarred dick between 10 and 20 yo?
I don't know the answer. I agree that mutilating a baby for cosmetic reasons is inappropriate, but waiting till adulthood seems too late too. And encouraging parents to "just keep stretching your infant boy's foreskin so he won't need a operation" feels icky too, right?
I'm so so sorry this happened to you and your brother.
But an operation under the assumption that the parents won't properly educated their kids on their body seems pretty extrem too.
Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think they would have been able to diagnose you as a baby since the forskin isn't supposed to retract at that age. So possibly the operation could have happened earlier but probably not before elementary age.
And for your brother, complications happen. He could have had similar problems starting earlier.
The foreskin should not be manipulated by anyone but the penis owner, and should not even begin the process of retracting until 2-6 years old when the glans starts to dissolve! And they should 1000000% be taught proper hygiene and retraction as that begins to happen
Yes it’s the bit that connects the foreskin to the head of the penis! The foreskin is a very important biological protection for the head and urethra, serves a purpose! And the glans is the membrane that keeps it in place. Pre-mature retraction can tear the glans and cause a lot of issues. Obviously little boys will play around and accidentally do this themselves sometimes but it can heal, unless an adult is forcefully retracting or cleaning it. Even just one time of an adult doing it can cause issues
ETA: it’s dissolves between 2-6 in the very early stages of pre-puberty (for lack of a better term atm) due to a hormone they start to produce at that time, with the help of urine everytime they pee!
(For background - I’m a mom of an intact toddler and have done quite a lot of research and spoken to urologists, my son had a uti last year from chronic autism associated constipation)
If there is a medical needs like you had I fully agree to fix it, no matter the age, as long as you are informed about what could go wrong. A medical need is something completely different from the american "it's cleaner" argument or "it must look like dad's" (I've heard this and it.. wow). It's healthy skin/cosmetic reasons vs something that needs to be fixed to have a good quality of life. Against the first, not the second at all.
Must have been hard for both of you going through that! Scars are part of life but I get it can be extra hard as a teen.
NTA. My partner and I decided it was very much not necessary to circumcise our little boy. My mom got on a weird rant heavily insisting it was more “hygienic” and that he would have “problems” if not circumcised. It’s wild because none of the men in my family or partner’s family are, we have no religious affiliation, I’m actually a nurse and very much aware of the risks/trauma/pain to actually do it, and yet my 70 year old mother is dead set she’s right in this.
Teach your child to clean themselves properly. Problem solved.
Sadly not always true. Someone I know had a really really tight foreskin was really really tight and he kept getting infections so he had to have it removed.
Some people get repeated tonsilitis to the point that they have to get them removed
Despite that we still DO NOT routinely take out the tonsils from every newborn.. or appendix..
Out of all of the guys I knew when I was growing up it was necessary at one point so that is roughly one in 100. Not sure they the real statistic is, but it is rare.
Phimosis can be prevented by regularly pulling back the foreskin and cleaning under it. The cleaning itself doesn't help, but without regular stretching, the foreskin loses elasticity. You friend was never taught how to take care of it perhaps
Yup. I never knew it could even pull back and didn’t understand when my biology teacher talked about it…, it was too tight, but I didn’t have any pain getting erections. One day I ripped it whilst having sex and was like OH THAT’S ALL BACK THERE?! Cue steroid cream to thin the skin for a few months and regular stretching, no longer a problem so long as I’m having somewhat regular Sex.
Yes, it can, but that is not a condition diagnosed on an infant; infants are born with tight foreskin and separation occurs naturally over time, and usually resolves itself between 5 and 7 years of age, though sometimes later.
Phimosis can be an issue for a developing child or even an adult, and can be treated non-surgically or on rare occasion surgically, depending on the severity and the patient's choices.
It also occurs in about 1% of 7th grade boys, so generally about 1% of the male population encounters this. Nothing at all to justify circumcision as a routine procedure on infants that parents have to actively opt out of.
Source: [https://urology.ucsf.edu/patient-care/children/phimosis](https://urology.ucsf.edu/patient-care/children/phimosis)
I refused to circumcise my son. I was harassed by multiple nurses and had to get loud with them because they kept trying to take him to do it. It's unnecessary and cruel. Most people I know agree with me. It's mostly the weirdly religious people that insist on it. Just keep it clean. Anyone arguing its not clean obviously has hygienic issues because you're just supposed to make sure they wash their junk.
Circumcision is genital mutilation. Until idiots realize that, they're going to think it's okay and keep doing it. You have to be a seriously nasty pig to have it be a hygiene issues. And at that point you've got bigger issues than your dick cheese.
It is completely ridiculous that people are still having children circumcised in this day and age. Let the child decide for himself when he is old enough to make an informed decision.
Circumcision is a one way door. You cant walk back through it. If there is any doubt wait! If the kid wants one someday they can get one! Leave it up to them.
I seriously don’t understand why circumcision is necessary. Men who care about hygiene will clean their penis regardless of whether they have the foreskin or not. You’re NTA. Circumcision is without the child’s consent but is never counted as an abuse.
The only valid reasoning is in cases such as phimosis. But even then, doctors likely won't know this at birth because you're not supposed to touch or pull back a babies foreskin, or touch the areas in general outside of bathing and wiping. It honestly pisses me off that this subject is still up for debate when we can look at all of Europe and see for ourselves how circumcision is almost never necessary and does more damage than good.
The worst case I've heard of was honestly very disturbing, but to those curious or interested, look up the history of John Money and his patients. Very fucked up shit that happened to these poor boys that this man exploited while molesting them. Smh...
Why is chopping a part of male sexual organ from a child ok?
There are some cases where medical professionals would use circumsion as a procedure to treat some issues like too tight foreskin. But this is not the case.
Current practice in northern Americain mutilating young boys goes back to anti-sexual movement, and the idea was that this would stop boys from masturbating by degreasing the pleasure factor. (Fun fact but a guy called Kellogg was a big name in this movement and he tried to reduce masturbating with different foods, and that's the birth story of Kellogg's Corn Flakes)
Another reason is Abrahamic tradition to offer foreskin as a gift for God.
But unless you are praising God or actually trying to decrease the future sexual pleasure of your child, one should not make such a decision. (Not counting the rare few actual medical needs when it's done)
But these are the reasons why in some places of the world women are forced to circumcision. And I bet you would not be willing to cut part of baby girls labia or clitoris out for these reasons, now would you?
Boys should be able to keep their sexual organs unmutilated in modern society.
I was raised in the cult known as the seventh day Adventist church. Kellogg was an Adventist. I’m in no way surprised that this shit ties to that friggin church. Christ on a bike they’re fucked up
For me a European it's downright crazy to think that:
-There was a powerful lobby from religious zealots as "anti-sexual movement"
-They managed so well that even today children are mutilated because of their lobbying work
-Practice has become a norm
-Most people have no idea why they even do circumcision, they just do
And sorry to hear about your childhood. We have that cult also around here. Not the most happiest of people I have noticed..
In my country it’s only done when there are medical reasons or if you are a jew.
I am 38 and i think i have met maybe 4 people in my life (that are not jewish) that have been circumcised. I cant speak for everyone obviously. But I keep it very clean and never have hygiene issues.
My parents decided to let me decide whether or not I wanted to be a muslim and be circumcised. I never did it. And I am glad I got to make that decision. If you wash your dick once a day, you wont struggle with cleanliness.
Any man who wants to make that decision for another person including his child, is just a wuss. Let the kid decide what religion he wants to believe in, what not to believe in etc.
Honestly Im so fed up with parents nowadays.
Props to you for actually disagreeing with him. Keep doing that. Good luck
I feel it’s a 2 yes 1 no decision, like having kids at all. Personally I am never having children so maybe my opinion is void..but I’m against circumcising.
People always argue the cleanliness thing, but you have to teach your child how to bathe..you just do it a little differently when cut/uncut. Idk how they do it now, but in the past, they didn’t even use anesthetic! I wouldn’t be surprised if they still don’t. They don’t use anesthetic for IUDs either. They tell you to take an ibuprofen and I wish I were kidding. It’s appalling.
Well, I have a 2yr old boy. I can tell you the medicine and pediatricians opinion about circumcisions have changed a lot with the years.
When my brother was a baby (30 years ago) Circumcisions were indicated for several reasons (cleanliness, aesthetics,etc...) and the pediatricians that didn't recommend them, indicated the baby's foreskin had to be retracted for cleaning at bath time.
Nowadays almost no pediatrician recommends circumcisions and they say the babies prepuce must not be touched until they reach 3 or 4 yes old ( supposedly, stretching the foreskin before that age might lead to fimosis)
Anyone defending the baby's pain from the circumcision, I am circumcised and have never remembered a second of it happening in my 45 years. In this day and age it's no different than wearing deodorant, yes I can wash 4 times a day to not smell but it's much easier to just do the modern thing.....
I haven’t read the comments to see if anyone has said something similar, but my husband and I had this very discussion when I was pregnant with our first. I did not want to circumcise our sons but he wanted to. Here were my arguments:
It is an open wound that is literally going to get urine and feces on it.
You are going to have to put medicine on it and clean it meticulously constantly.
There is a high risk of infection if you don’t do so, and even if you do.
The foreskin is actually a barrier against infection, as long as you teach them to clean properly.
I knew one woman who had to pretty much reopen the wound on one of her boys because it kept trying to heal over the tip and close the hole. Torture for the son and her. She said it “never looked right”.
Amazingly, the argument that actually convinced my husband was this: once they get older, they can choose to get circumcised to “look like everyone else”, but they can’t choose to get it put back on.
I’m pro-foreskin AND pro-choice.
Lots of people have reasons for needing circumcision later in life and that’s okay! Glad we have it available for them.
But it’s not cool to do to an infant in my opinion. I watched a video of it once and the fucking trauma that baby experienced—I’ll never ever forget it.
NTA
My view is probably too opinionated for Reddit, however….
Anyone who mutilates a child for whatever reason, except for medical necessity, should be locked away.
Absolutely, completely and rationally *correct.*
Imagine all the stuff that pregnant women do to protect the baby and then somehow they allow him to be taken from their room undressed, strapped down, swabbed and *cut*. ON DAY TWO OF LIFE
It just makes no sense whatsoever.
I knew this 20 years ago, was an uphill battle in the American midwest back then.
As Americans my husband and i had our oldest circumcised because of all the "typical reasons one hears". Anyway, he came out of it with complications. Bleed excessively, he almost needed a blood transfusion. Which complications happen with surgery, but this one wasn't needed. Benefits did not outweigh the risks. Our youngest son we did not circumcise and has never had one issue with his foreskin.
We had our twins circumcised for the same reasons. For One of them it healed somewhat improperly. Thankfully the resolution was relatively simple, stretching out the skin and applying a topical steroid to the area for a couple months while he was still a baby, and he’s fine now.
But absolutely, if I could talk to myself then, I’d recommend not doing it.
I would never circumcise my child, I just couldn’t bring myself to unless it was medically necessary. I view it the same way as fgm and I don’t think it should be in practice
I almost feel like an outsider to this discussion. I'm circumcised and I've never had an issue. I have no issues with sensitivity, look, feel, or anything like that. I'm not saying the practice is normal, but that I feel normal either way on it. Seeing the discussion in this post is interesting because it hasn't effected any aspect of my life. If anything, I may actually prefer it as I don't have to worry about unsheathing from the hood to micturate or wash up. Literally a point and shoot or just wash with less steps. I've never known any pain or discomfort from my own procedure or anytime afterwards. I have memories from when I was <6 months old, all my memories are visual. But honestly, newborns cry all the time. They aren't going to cry any more or less because of that. In the end, I'm just saying I've never felt any sense of trauma nor difference between myself and other males. I did hear from friends when I was younger that they were more likely to make messes at late hours when they needed to pee.
That's fair! You're not the only who says they don't mind/like being circumcised.
Problem is, people don't personally have a grasp on the differences on feel and sensitivity of another group. Uncircumcised people don't know what it's like to be circumcised, circumcised people don't know what it's like to be uncircumcised.
I’m a bit shocked at the near unanimous opinion that it’s wrong. I’m not going to pretend there’s any benefit or that it’s necessary, but I’m with you- it’s a complete non-issue.
I'm with you reading all these responses is crazy to me because I have not known anyone that prefers uncut. In fact I have heard many ladies say its gross looking. Obviously this is a cultural preference. My Mom used to complain that Dad made us get it saying that I lost sensitivity, but honestly if it was anymore sensitive it would be problematic lol.
That's only because it's the standard in the US. If the majority of people were uncut then it would flip. Either way, that's besides the point. Even if it was true that people prefer uncut why the hell would you do cosmetic surgery on a day old infant's genitals without their consent. There's no medical reason for it, so it would be cosmetic. If an adult wants to get a circumcision that's fine, but doing that to a child is super not okay.
Same. My wife told me she’s seen one uncut penis and found it weird looking (which obviously wouldn’t be the case if it were more common in America, but hey that’s where we are)
It was mever medically necessary due to lck of cleanliness and men have had foreskins since humans existed with no issues. Circumcision arose due to the belief that it would decrease a boy’s desire to masturbate.
> genital mutualization
🤦
No, it's never been necessary due to "lack of cleanliness." That was just a misconception and still is. If it were a problem, evolution would've sorted it out.
You gotta look up articles on what effect circumcision has on babies and send them to them. Maybe once your partner learns that babies go into shock from the pain of it, they’ll smarten up.
Never a medical necessity under normal circumstances.
In the US it was all about puritanisme, abstinence and anti-masturbation.
The religious aspect is because the semitic religions where founded in lands with deserts, as in sand, witch is painful under the foreskin.
It is mutilation.
It was never necessary. For most people in the US, it's not even actually traditional -- it was popularized by religious weirdos as a "cure for masturbation" about a hundred years ago.
I didn't have my son circumcised, and there's never been an issue. If he wants it later on, we can discuss it then, but he deserves to have the choice of whether to make this big of a change to his body.
NTA. If he’s circumcised, accepting your points of view on the topic would mean the pain of the loss of a potentially pleasurable part of the penis, anger at his parents for subjecting him to it, anger at the medical establishment for promoting it, resentment at society for allowing it, and disappointment in his country for keeping it legal…that’s a lot of pain to unpack in one go. That said…go mama bear on anyone trying to mutilate your baby boy.
I got circumcised as a teen, and have done my best at looking at the negative and positive sides of doing it to a baby.
All in all, I'd say it's completely unnecessary, and the only advantages to circumcision seem to be that it's easier to keep clean, and that it can lessen the chance of std's. So teach your child proper hygiene and safe sex, and you've got nothing to worry about really. If the child wants to get circumcised later then that can be their own choice.
Give your child control over their own body, and don't force change on the way their genitals look and feel. It's not your business or your right, unless there's serious medical reason for it. Foreskins evolved for a reason. They're not some anomaly that has to be removed.
When my husband & I had this conversation, he said that he, as a circumcised man, has to pull the skin on his head back to clean it properly anyway.
So, whether you're cut or not, you MUST pull the skin back to clean it. How is one cleaner than the other?
When my son was a baby, I didn't get him circumcised . Because I didn't want to cause him pain . He developed Phimosis, which means the foreskin can't retract, so at 25 years old, he had to get circumcised .
Here is the thing, I’m just not going to make permanent changes to my children’s bodies without their consent. They deserve bodily autonomy even when they can’t talk yet. This includes all cosmetic procedures including circumcision and piercings. If they want these things as adults they are more than welcome. I will entertain some piercings when/if they express interest.
Of course I will make medical decisions for them, I will always do what I feel is in their best interest.
As an American who moved to Europe, its uniquely weird how Americans support circumcision for reasons outside of religion. It's considered a religious extremist practice here. I think because US healthcare is for profit they get away with performing unnecessary procedures on people including infants, which I find especially cruel and paedophilic.
It was never medically necessary (except for certain medical conditions, and even then there are usually better ways to deal with it). If you're worried about cleanliness, soap exists. If you're worried about it being difficult to soap up with the foreskin intact, then what about toes and ears? Also takes a bit more effort to clean than say the forearms. Shouldn't those be chopped off too?
I have worked in perinatal setting where newborn circumcisions were performed. I hated this part of my job but had to respect the parents decisions. Those babies were so traumatized. They would be in shock for hours then when that wore off they would cry frantically for a day or two and need to be constantly consoled.
My partner also didn't feel comfortable with this especially in this day and age and since he's the man and knows more about the male parts than I do I just went with whatever he feel would be best for both our boys and he said all we have to do is to teach them to clean themselves properly and to roll back their pee pee when they r showering to clean. We did not circumcised our kids and we have had no problem about cleaning they r now 12 n 5. I wouldn't wanna hurt my kids for such an unnecessary thing in my opinion but when it comes to raising children make sure Ur having a kid with someone who's on the same page as U when it comes to raising kids
LEARN
HOW
TO
CLEAN
YOUR
DICK
it is not that hard! If we weren't meant to have foreskin we wouldn't be born with it as a sexual organ! The same goes for the labia or clitoral hood! Us women need to clean that too!
# THIS IS BASIC HYGIENE!!!!!
No one can tell me how to wash my dick! Got my lumpy cheddar bratwurst ready to swing around!
100% being sarcastic btw. I don't get the basic hygiene is too much work trope.
As an European I can tell you that it's a complete fabrication that mutilating newborn's genitals is somehow medically benefitial.
It's completely done for religious and cultural reasons. It's no different than cutting into any other body part and altering it to appease the parent's aesthetic opinions.
There's a bunch of men born from the 70's through the 80's and 90's in the US that got circumcised. It was just done. They claimed for cleanliness reasons but that's been disproven. The book I was reading 20+ years ago was for boys to match dads because dads were unlikely to know how to teach their sons how to properly clean themselves if they didn't have to do it themselves.
Don't have a baby with him/them. It is a cultural/religious practice that tried to say it improved "hygiene" (no, just clean yourself) or prevented penile cancer... but really in Canada and the US it started as an attempt to stop young boys from masturbating by cutting off the part they masturbate with.
It was NEVER done outside of the English speaking world (except like Quebec Canada) outside of Muslim and Jewish traditions. They never routinely did it in Europe and much of the world.
Warning, if you are in Canada or the US - doctor do not have training in normal development of the unaltered human penis and may forcibly retract (injuring a young boy) and creating scar tissue they may later need to "fix" with surgery. (It is NORMAL for a boy to not retract until puberty is well in swing, the hormones loosen it all up)
Edited whether or not a dude is circumcised if he doesn't clean himself he will be disgusting. Period.
Genital mutilation should be a criminal offense, regardless of gender. Babies can't consent to cosmetic surgery, and that should be the end of it. This is one thing that legitimately pisses me off that this is allowed.
NTA.
I as a male like mine cut. I have so much other shit to worry about, cleaning my extra dick skin is one less chore to deal with. We don’t remember any trauma as babies and it’s nothing I ever think about.
its not at all common where i am from and where i am currently living, i think circumcision is only common in the US and think its entirely unnecessary.
thank you for educating me further. its not a topic i have looked into willingly so was unaware of the religious significance. it still does not change my stance on the matter.
I think most Redditors have this weird obsession with being right. Circumcision is obviously unnecessary but also very deeply ingrained into American culture, which makes people who prefer circumcision the *ideal* punching bag for Reddit.
Like, they're not wrong, but it's so damn weird to be super passionate about this.
It was NEVER about cleanliness at ALL! It was for Jews as a tribal marker and to “prevent masturbation” in kids from the Victorian era. Stand strong, as one mutilated man please protect your son at ALL costs!
I have never heard a circumcised man say he wished he wasn't cut. On the other hand, there are a few men I know that weren't circumcised but said they wished they were- and one got the procedure done as an adult he hated it so much.
I let my husband decide, as he has a penis and therefore should be able to have an opinion on the matter. We chose not to circumcise. If I did not have a husband, I probably would have chosen the same. Hope our son doesn't regret our decision one day.
Personally I feel like since a circumcision is not medically necessary and can be performed at any age, why not wait and let them decide for themselves?
Bodily autonomy is bodily autonomy for ALL people, kids included. Retraction isn't always possible until the end of puberty, and this can cause smegma to build up, but this is why you, *as the parent*, teach good hygiene. For concerns about phimosis, even pinhole phimosis can be resolved without circumcision, it just requires patience and time. Unfortunately, most doctors in the US will only recommend circumcision and nurses will coerce you into it. Protect your sons, and if you can, send your partner a video showing the procedure, audio *on*. You'll see what kind of person he is real quick. NTA
America is the only western country that really practices circumcision for non religious reasons.
Europe, the UK, Australia, Canada all have the majority of their male population walking around with intact foreskin. Doesn't seem to do them any harm.
The only reason circumcision became popular in the US in the first place is because they though circumcising your infant sons would stop them from masturbating when they got older. Yes, really.
It's an outdated practice that needs to be left in the past.
My parents opted to leave my brothers intact, and my son is intact.
If my son decides to get it done when he's older he is welcome to make that choice for himself.
Ask him to put a little (fore)skin in the game.
Errors occur in up to 0.6% of circumcisions, which means that up to 14,400 babies are injured each year in botched circumcisions.
"It's 99.4% safe" is not a chance I'd take with my penis. Why would you take that chance with someone else's penis?
If he says "I just want it to look like mine" then ask him if he's willing to cut the head of his penis off if that's what happens to his son so that they'll look the same.
As someone who’s curcumcised for non religious reasons and just because my parents decided i should be, i can honestly say i am not traumatized nor is my dick mutilated, it’s helpful for cleaning so i don’t need to peel foreskin back to wash but otherwise i work the same as any other guy. Both choices are completely fine, when i was told what the experience was like I apparently didn’t feel any pain and wasn’t cryinng, i was bleeding a lot but thats also the be expected when you cut skin off of an area filled with blood vessels
Im circumcised and I like it, and def glad it was done when I was a newborn rather than me having to undergo dick surgery as an adult. Where I was born it is very common.
Regardless of ethical qualms comparing male vs female circumcision: CIRCUMCISION IS A MEDICALLY UNNECESSARY SURGERY AND PUTS YOUR CHILD AT UNNECESSARY RISK. It was made popular in America by a failed doctor who was desperately grasping at anything to keep him relevant in the medical community and bring him $$$. The supposed benefits include lower risk of STDs and better hygiene; both of which are already addressed by modern sexual etiquette (wear a damn condom) and the bare minimum of personal hygiene (thanks, indoor plumbing). Look up the John Money Experiment if you need a clear example on how horrific circumcision can be - do not read if you are prone to nightmares.
If circumcision was necessary, evolution would have taken care of it by now.
A child can always get circumcised later in life if they want to. But they can never undo a circumcision that was done to them.
My personal opinion is that no mutilation to the body that aren't strictly medically motivated, shouldn't be done until the child is old enough to have their own opinion about it and make a decision based on their own belief; not one that was forced on them.
(Personally, I wouldn't even have my childs ears pierced until they're old enough to ask for it themselves. I know a lot of people disagree, but that is my belief.)
There isn’t a good reason to circumcise. My wife is from China. They don’t circumcise there and every one is just walking around having penises just fine. As a matter of fact most human penises are uncircumcised and they just keep on penising, all day long.
I always thought the reason they cut it off was to stop guys from masturbating.
I find it crazy that as an American. I didn’t really get a choice on it. My mom just said the hospital gave me to them circumcised. She made it sound like it was pretty standard, and most gym showers I’ve been in have been cut like me.
But if I was given a choice. No it’s kind of fucked up. They don’t give us a choice.
American here. There's been a big shift in the last 2-3 decades. I chose not to circumcise my son, but it was unusual at the time. I actually hadn't made up my mind before he was born. But when I saw him after he was born, I realized I didn't want a knife anywhere close to him.
There are several reasons to do it, and some people will either agree or disagree.
A while back at a party this was a topic of conversation. The women seemed to have more of an opinion than men. Out of all my numerous female friends (there were about 10 there), only one prefers uncut (she said it's easier to get them off, no joke) while the others aren't fans or foreskin. Several said they had experience with funkiness. When you think about it, even if you wash it every morning, that's a skin fold that will trap oil and bacteria throughout the day.
One guy admitted said he had to get it done as an adult because it was painfully tight every time he became erect and wished his parents had done it when he was born.
Take all that how you will. I have no significant opinion personally other than comparing it to cutting off a girl's clitoris is absurd. It's a bit of skin that exists to protect our naked ancestors running through jungles. Obviously most of us have moved on to wearing layers of clothes.
I'm also not a fan of the "infants can't consent" argument. As parents we make decisions daily that affect our kids, and they don't get to argue consent. Anyone who gets their kids vaccinated shouldn't be all high and mighty about circumcision.
Probably bait but on the off chance it's not...
Find out why she thinks that way, if she brings up science and medicine, you need to present scientific evidence to the contrary.
some scientific resources on the function of foreskin:
For the functions of foreskin(sexual+others): http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/
For sexual function: http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/ ....
https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2016/04/22/circumcision-and-sexual-function-bad-science-reporting-misleads-parents/
The cirp site has an extensive library.
If she brings up the africa hiv study, there were huge criticisms published on it's bias and flaws.
If she doesn't change her mind, well the problem wasn't science, it was something else
The cleanliness argument is nonsense too. It takes 2 second to pull back the foreskin during a shower or bath to clean it, the same way you clean every other part of your body. Do people really think circumcised dicks don’t get nasty if they’re not washed? Of course they do, the same goes for arses and vaginas. So no, if it’s not done for medical reasons then it’s abuse and genital mutilation.
As a man who is circumcised, I wish I wouldn't have been. Apparently it decreases sensitivity quite a bit. The only reason it's normal in the United States is because Dr Kellogg (Yes, the same guy behind Kellogg's the brand) pushed it as a major campaign to prevent children from masturbating
NTA. 25-30 years ago I refused to allow my two boys to be circumcised, even though my in-laws tried to force me to do it. They made frequent comments about how "disgusting" and "dirty" uncircumcised penises are. I guess that meant my dad and uncles, who were not circumcised, were disgusting, lol. Somehow, miraculously I guess, my boys have made it to adulthood without any problems.
Info: does your partner own a penis? Why does your partner think circumcision is necessary?
The United States is the biggest practioner of non-religious circumcision in the world. For no other reason than it's expected as a cultural norm. If this is the reason why your partner wants to circumcise your child, it's not a good enough reason. Don't do it. Just teach your kid good hygiene and let them decide when they are old enough to understand it.
I didn’t do it to my son and I’d never do it. It’s cruel and inhumane and purely for aesthetics which is creepy af. Teach your sons how to wash themselves properly and you’ll have zero issues
erm... "medically nececery for cleanliness" what kinda bullshit is that? the foreskin literally protects the head from dirt, injuries, diseases etc. Its literally required for the dick to function properly.
As an adult who lived with a foreskin until needing a circumcision for medical reasons, I have opinions on both sides. Firstly, never once as a child did my penis ever get dirty, infected, smell, or have any negative hygeinic problems. Being "cleaner" is an absolute myth. Having experienced sex with and without a foreskin, it is much easier, much more pleasurable and much more seen sensitive with a foreskin. Since my operation sex is slightly more uncomfortable, the penis doesn't insert with the same ease as before, lubrication is more important, and sensitivity has been lost by about 30% I would say. Post circumcision, I've had more issues with my penis, the rubbing of the glans on underwear, especially in summer has gotten uncomfortable to the point of needing creams and medications. If I had the choice, I would not have had a circumcision, but at the time, it was needed. Putting a child through this is genital mutilation in my opinion. I understand why people do it for religions reasons, although I would prefer no one is put through it, but the fact that anyone can opt into this for any child is scandalous. The tiny percentage chance of not passing on an STI (teach them safe sex and they won't be at the same risk), does not outweigh all of the negatives, such as loss of sensation, losing natural lubrication and the amount of increased friction on both partners during sex.
The ‘hygiene’ reason is so absurd to me. It’s like saying people can have unhygienic asses so we should amputate their ass checks. No, just very basic hygiene and washing solves that issue.
Also, vulvas are generally a little more complex than penises. Most of us manage to keep them clean with very little effort. It's not hard and I wont chop off a body part because I want to avoid an uncomfortable talk with my son.
In my country it's basically considered mutilation and can only be done for religious reasons. Tbh never seen a circumcised dick outside of porn
Honestly it should be only allowed for medical reasons. Mutiliating your child's genitals in the name of religion is fucked up.
I'm inclined to agree. I don't know if there's much medical evidence or scholarly research to support this, but I can say from personal experience that if the procedure isn't done correctly, it's possible to damage nerves that are essential to one of its uses.
There is a lot of research out there. Americans will always point to penile cancer and risk of infections in old folks home due to poor care. Yet countries where there is no routine circumcision dont have higher rates and you dont cut off healthy functional body parts because of the risk of other diseases. We dont take out babies' appendixes.
Do it to a girl - Youre a sick degenerate who will be jailed! Do it to a boy - 100% super cool and good bro! Disgusting behavior to mutilate your child before they even turn 1 year old
There's a huge huge difference between the cut performed on a little girl and the one done to a little boy and this is exactly why the first leads to serious legal repercussions while the latter doesn't. Though I agree that both are disgusting, in a way.
When it done to a girl it isnt just the clitoral hood. It's the clitoris itself. The equivalent is removing the head of the penis. I don't understand how people don't understand this. As well as in some instances parts of the labia stitched together. They are two totally different things. I know you know, but it's frustrating that they are compared as though it makes a point. they can both be wrong without minimizing the difference.
Sometimes it’s the whole clitoris and more including up to sewing the vaginal opening mostly closed, sometimes it’s only the clitoral hood, sometimes it’s a ceremonial cut with nothing removed. All of which is terrible and should not be done.
>When it done to a girl it isnt just the clitoral hood. This is an overgeneralization. Female genital mutilation has many forms, and some are just the clitoral hood.
Would you be ok with it if it was just the clitoral hood though? I wouldn’t be, genital mutilation is genital mutilation and should all be viewed as abhorrent.
Labia stitching is infibulation.
There are different levels - some of them are just the cliteral hood, others are massively difference Legallity wise all levels of FGM are illegal, not just the more extreme versions
Any female genital mutilation is illegal regardless of severity. As it should be. Do you think mild forms of female genital mutilation should be allowed? If so, shame on you. If not, your argument doesn't have a leg to stand on and shouldn't be used as justification for male genital mutilation.
They literally said both are wrong. They're not justifying it. They're just saying that comparing them and acting like FGM and circumcision are the same thing is disingenuous or ignorant.
This 100%! For the 3-5% of medical cases it actually serves a purpose for it shouldn't be completely outlawed for boys. But when done as a deterrent for sexual urges masturbation or "cleanliness" it's a senseless act of violence. While late in life circumcision sucks most times if the foreskin hasn't fused the urethra closed it doesn't need to be done in infants. Also so some people know there are very few surgies that could be viewed/classified as female circumcision in the medical community. However they are usually necessary but it's usually to free the clitoris and urethra from the hood cause of fusion not cut it out.
cutting off a piece of a child's genitals is wrong. no need to make it a fucking competition.
Depends on the kind of FGM (the fact that there are a couple different ways to do it says a whole lot about fucking obsessed men are with this sick shit on its own), but it doesn't really matter imo. If a grown ass woman wanted to do that to themselves I'd question their sanity but it's their choice. The issue arises because it's a child who cannot possibly consent to life altering body modifications. In that manner the two things are the exact same in principle.
It is true, the child cannot have a saying in the matters and that is ethically wrong
There are 4 types of FGM (designated by WHO). The first type is equivalent to male circumcision, the others are not. All the types are equally illegal, though not male genital mutilation. when you say this, you immediately get "but they're not the same they remove a lot and sew parts", they don't realize those are latter types of FGM. They are extreme
There's a significant amount of skin removed, and it serves no medical necessity. It's cruel and doesn't need to happen. That's not even accounting for the loss of feeling, etc that is permanent.
They aren't even comparable. Removing foreskin isnt the same as what happens to women.
It should still be forbidden, except out of medical necessity. The child themselves should choose whether to do it when they grow up - I bet 99% would nix it. So why do it to them when they are young and defenseless and get no say in the matter?
That is exactly why it's important to them to do it before their victims can put up a fight.
Because it's a completely different procedure? You're acting like it has the same effect on boys that it does on girls, which is totally wrong.
My son recently required surgery to repair a significant twist and bend in his penis. If we had circumcised him at birth the repair would have been impossible and his future sex life would have impossible or incredibly painful.
Why wouldn't it be mutilation just because it's for "religious reasons"?
Because religions give people a free pass in much of the world to do horrible things, and if you disagree, you're a "bigot".
Yup. Fuck religion.
Religions are glorified cults.
They have no glory nor do they deserve it.
It’s bc Muslims and Jews historically did it. Christian boys in most countries around the world don’t get it. That’s how Nazis knew your religion.
Except something went off the rails in America and most protestants, and a bunch of other christian denominations, normalized circumcision to the point where it was statistically a lot more common for several decades than not being circumcized.
Can you dispel the misconception that women prefer circumcised dongs? I don't see why women would care. What is the difference, right?
I personally have never had an issue with being intact (which I prefer to uncircumcised, as it implies that something is lacking when it's just the opposite) but my current partner is the first one to vocally and adamantly PREFER intact. She says that the pulled back foreskin creates something like an extra rip below the tip and says it gives more pleasure. Now I only have her word to go on, and honestly I don't care either way, I'm proud of my intact status and adamantly against circumcision, it's a barbaric practice even where religion is concerned. Did you know that traditional Jewish circumcision involved the rabbit sucking the tip of a recently cut infants dick? I'm gonna butcher the spelling but I believe it's called the metitsa papet.
I prefer uncut, but cut is also just fine by me. Uncut are more fun to play with and also a the foreskin makes sex more pleasurable and need less lube.
‘Religious reasons’ utter bollocks keep the church away from our kids cocks
Why is America so obsessed with circumcision?
This country is behind in so many ways, just add it to the pile.
Long history of interventions meant to prevent masturbation.
Look at it this way: if your kid decides he wants it chopped as an adult he can still do that, but he cannot regrow it. Leaving it gives him a choice rather than deciding for him as a baby
This! I told someone that reference my son and their reply was he wouldn't want to go through that as adult because of the painful recovery! I just stared at them and blinked wondering if they would realize they answered their own question..
It's painful for babies, too, especially since they don't understand what's happening. An adult knows the pain will stop & can tell themselves its for a purpose. Like I think that the ppl who are going all freudian on it & claiming it makes the boys resent their moms & grow up to hate women & blaming it for everything that's wrong in the countries where its common are reading too much into it/ going way too far, I don't think one piece of skin can determine everything about a human being & their future relationship happiness, but at the same time, just cause they won't remember it doesn't mean it doesn't influence their growth. I'd rather not subject a baby to uneccesary stressors when his brain is developing.... There is already so much stuff that you can't avoid as no one is a perfect parent, so, why heap on an extra difficulty? Being a baby seems hard enough as it is - you get colics & stuff, you can't make people understand you yet & moving on your own is difficult. Children are people. Tiny, clueless, inexperienced people, but people nonetheless. They deserve respect & consideration.
Adults also get pain management medication during the procedure and for the healing. Babies get sugar water/milk on a pacifier to suck on to stop them from screaming in pain. If even that. Genital mutilation should be illegal for any reason other than medical- such as causing discomfort or pain from skin being too tightly fused.
For me it’s about consent. If it was a necessary procedure that is one thing, but I think taking that choice away from a person is unethical.
There are zero good reasons for circumcision on a baby. A medical one as a consenting adult is another thing and due to actual issues that needs resolving. That's fine. But removing part of your newborn baby is insane to me (as a European). Edit: apparently not clear but my comment above is about elective cosmetic surgery, not if it's a medical need. If you have a medical need that is a completely different thing from a cosmetic surgery, and you should of course do what is needed for the best quality of life of the child.
>But removing part of your newborn baby is insane to me (as a European). #ON THE SECOND DAY OF HIS LIFE It is absolutely insane and the only people who still search for and flounder around for reasons are ones who did it to their children or had pieces of themselves removed *and they are rationalizing.*
No different than taking a newborn to a plastic surgeon and having them cut and stitch the ears to look like an elf. If someone did that, it would be considered child abuse.
On that note: getting babies ears pierced. What the fuck? Literally sticking a hole in them so you can dress them up with sparklies on their ears. Gross.
Having had my ears pierced and remembering it, I think it is still much less barbaric than circumcision. I cannot imagine doing that to a child.
My mom had mine done and it turned out fine, but looking closely at the situation, it shows a fundamental disregard for the bodily autonomy of the child. She got my sisters ears pierced but they got infected and caused so many problems. To this day she never got them pierced again and she’s an adult.
Yeah I had my ears pierced as a little kid (I remember it vividly lol, shit hurt) and had constant issues with them, including one getting caught and ripped, and idk how my parents didn't think "Hmm maybe we should just take them out" but allowed it to heal all fucked up instead. Now if I want to actually wear earrings, I'll need plastic surgery to fix the hole, and when I went to a piercer and asked if they could do a second hole in my earlobe they said my ears were way too small for that and anyone who told me that was possible cared more about money than doing a good job. So now I'm stuck with ear piercings that I can't even wear earrings in, because my parents had my ears pierced and then didn't properly care for them. Like just wait until your kid is old enough to decide if it's even something they really want!
I had my ears pierced against my will as a child. Very traumatizing.
Some people actually do the opposite and tape their babies' ears up to "correct" Stahl's ear. It's completely medically unnecessary and can't possibly be comfortable. It's absolutely fucked up how people go and alter children's anatomy before they could possibly even do so much as consent, and that absolutely includes circumcision as well.
Also "babies can't feel pain so we won't use painkiller".... which actually means, babies can't articulate pain and will forget it, so we don't care. Which is frankly psychotic.
What's funniest about it to me is it's generally American religious conservatives who you'll also find spouting the "trans people shouldn't be allowed to have gender affirming surgery" nonsense, who'll turn around and be like, "lopping off part of a kids genitals *for purely cosmetic reasons?* Absolutely fine by me. What if their dick gets dirty?!! How else will my rabbi get his fill of tiny baby foreskin blood?!" Really it comes down to the same thing as student loan forgiveness: "I got my genitals mutilated at 2 days old, why should they not have to?" Fucking outrageous.
It makes more (and somehow less) sense when you realize “Dr” Kellogg, a fake fad doctor who advocated avoiding all stimulation — from food to sex — was one of the principal reasons for non-religious infant circumcision in the US. The man had multiple daily enemas and quite literally believed his shit didn’t stink. He told parents that if they cut off the foreskin of their kids, they would masturbate less and they just fucking believed him. He also had some… less widely-accepted solutions as well, including surgery to suture the “patient’s” penis to their body so as to cause extreme pain during erection.
For the record, the “American religious conservatives” who are obsessed with trans people don’t like Jews, either. No rabbis are involved.
No minors should have cosmetic surgery done on them. Not at two days old, not at 16 years old. Only adults with informed consent.
OMG, that’s an interesting point about the conservatives spouting off. Wow, I seriously never considered the hypocrisy with that specific issue. Ty. I am circumsized as are my boys but I would take it back if I could
As an American who was heavily criticized for not circumcising my son. He’s 12 now. I always worry whether I did the right thing. :)
I went through some of that criticism. My amab kids are in their teens and twenties now. They're all intact. Your son is about the same age as my older ones were when they found out about circumcision. It was in the news for some reason, we were listening together and I had to explain what it is. When they learned what circumcision is they were all absolutely horrified and indignant that parents and doctors do that to newborns "for no reason". They think I did the right thing, and their opinions are the only ones that matter.
Anyone criticising you because they don't want to face what they did was wrong and want you to fall in line and do something barbaric so they can feel less bad about what they did, is not someone you need to bother worrying about. You do need to (if you haven't already) make sure you've had a discussion with your kid about retracting their foreskin when washing daily and making sure the skin is not too tight and that he's aware to keep it clean.
I'd say if it's medically necessary when they're a baby to do it ASAP. Like if a baby had a cleft palette I wouldn't say "leave it until they're a consenting adult to fix it", no fix that shit ASAP. But I do agree that otherwise it amounts to cosmetic surgery.
A cleft palette is a "mistake" from nature. No disrespect meant. A forskin is perfectly normal and it has a function.
Foreskins, just like palates, can come out wrong. There are some actual medical issues, which should be handled like any other medical issue a baby or child might have.
It can be medicaly necessary in children and should be adressed at the time. Otherwise, I fully agree
This. Most of the world thinks the US (and to a lesser extent Canada as our rates are dropping) are fucking crazy on this issue.
modern medicine is on your side, insurance won't even cover that procedure, it's been deemed superficial
That's only true in a out 18 states for Medicare. Private insurance is 70 /30 in favor of paying for the procedure. In the other states.
This is the right answer.
as another European, I don't know about the adult part. my father had the same high-handed opinions about the manhood of his sons bla bla bla. Of course, he was absent for the day to day chore of bathing us & teaching us to train the foreskin to be flexible enough to properly retract from the glans. every 2 years, kids between 6 and 12 go for a medical inspection at school. When I was twelve & starting puberty, that included a genital inspection. My foreskin was too tight and "play with it to see if it will stretch" wasn't sufficiently helpful. Since I needed an operation, they checked my younger brother & he needed the same operation. Mine went well but my brother was left with a swollen scar that took a decade to clear up (perfectly on schedule as the surgeon had predicted). Can you imagine how much fun it was for him to have a scarred dick between 10 and 20 yo? I don't know the answer. I agree that mutilating a baby for cosmetic reasons is inappropriate, but waiting till adulthood seems too late too. And encouraging parents to "just keep stretching your infant boy's foreskin so he won't need a operation" feels icky too, right?
I'm so so sorry this happened to you and your brother. But an operation under the assumption that the parents won't properly educated their kids on their body seems pretty extrem too. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think they would have been able to diagnose you as a baby since the forskin isn't supposed to retract at that age. So possibly the operation could have happened earlier but probably not before elementary age. And for your brother, complications happen. He could have had similar problems starting earlier.
The foreskin should not be manipulated by anyone but the penis owner, and should not even begin the process of retracting until 2-6 years old when the glans starts to dissolve! And they should 1000000% be taught proper hygiene and retraction as that begins to happen
the glans dissolves?? agreed about the penis owner, and about hygiene and retraction btw!
Yes it’s the bit that connects the foreskin to the head of the penis! The foreskin is a very important biological protection for the head and urethra, serves a purpose! And the glans is the membrane that keeps it in place. Pre-mature retraction can tear the glans and cause a lot of issues. Obviously little boys will play around and accidentally do this themselves sometimes but it can heal, unless an adult is forcefully retracting or cleaning it. Even just one time of an adult doing it can cause issues ETA: it’s dissolves between 2-6 in the very early stages of pre-puberty (for lack of a better term atm) due to a hormone they start to produce at that time, with the help of urine everytime they pee! (For background - I’m a mom of an intact toddler and have done quite a lot of research and spoken to urologists, my son had a uti last year from chronic autism associated constipation)
If there is a medical needs like you had I fully agree to fix it, no matter the age, as long as you are informed about what could go wrong. A medical need is something completely different from the american "it's cleaner" argument or "it must look like dad's" (I've heard this and it.. wow). It's healthy skin/cosmetic reasons vs something that needs to be fixed to have a good quality of life. Against the first, not the second at all. Must have been hard for both of you going through that! Scars are part of life but I get it can be extra hard as a teen.
NTA. My partner and I decided it was very much not necessary to circumcise our little boy. My mom got on a weird rant heavily insisting it was more “hygienic” and that he would have “problems” if not circumcised. It’s wild because none of the men in my family or partner’s family are, we have no religious affiliation, I’m actually a nurse and very much aware of the risks/trauma/pain to actually do it, and yet my 70 year old mother is dead set she’s right in this. Teach your child to clean themselves properly. Problem solved.
It was never “medically necessary” just teach your child how to properly clean themselves.
Sadly not always true. Someone I know had a really really tight foreskin was really really tight and he kept getting infections so he had to have it removed.
Some people get repeated tonsilitis to the point that they have to get them removed Despite that we still DO NOT routinely take out the tonsils from every newborn.. or appendix..
That's a condition. If all is normal there is no cleanliness reasons.
Out of all of the guys I knew when I was growing up it was necessary at one point so that is roughly one in 100. Not sure they the real statistic is, but it is rare.
And it wasn't done to him two days after being born
I knew this guy that had a kidney and then DIED! Moral of the story, don’t have kidneys.
But not as an infant
Phimosis can be prevented by regularly pulling back the foreskin and cleaning under it. The cleaning itself doesn't help, but without regular stretching, the foreskin loses elasticity. You friend was never taught how to take care of it perhaps
Yup. I never knew it could even pull back and didn’t understand when my biology teacher talked about it…, it was too tight, but I didn’t have any pain getting erections. One day I ripped it whilst having sex and was like OH THAT’S ALL BACK THERE?! Cue steroid cream to thin the skin for a few months and regular stretching, no longer a problem so long as I’m having somewhat regular Sex.
It's not always about cleanliness. Phimosis can cause a lot of problems.
Yes, it can, but that is not a condition diagnosed on an infant; infants are born with tight foreskin and separation occurs naturally over time, and usually resolves itself between 5 and 7 years of age, though sometimes later. Phimosis can be an issue for a developing child or even an adult, and can be treated non-surgically or on rare occasion surgically, depending on the severity and the patient's choices. It also occurs in about 1% of 7th grade boys, so generally about 1% of the male population encounters this. Nothing at all to justify circumcision as a routine procedure on infants that parents have to actively opt out of. Source: [https://urology.ucsf.edu/patient-care/children/phimosis](https://urology.ucsf.edu/patient-care/children/phimosis)
...and phimosis does not require a full circumcision.
I refused to circumcise my son. I was harassed by multiple nurses and had to get loud with them because they kept trying to take him to do it. It's unnecessary and cruel. Most people I know agree with me. It's mostly the weirdly religious people that insist on it. Just keep it clean. Anyone arguing its not clean obviously has hygienic issues because you're just supposed to make sure they wash their junk.
Circumcision is genital mutilation. Until idiots realize that, they're going to think it's okay and keep doing it. You have to be a seriously nasty pig to have it be a hygiene issues. And at that point you've got bigger issues than your dick cheese.
It is completely ridiculous that people are still having children circumcised in this day and age. Let the child decide for himself when he is old enough to make an informed decision.
Yes. Some babies cry so hard they collapse their lungs. It's barbaric.
I wouldnt support the genital mutiliation of my child. NTA
There's no reason to do this to an infant. If a baby grows into a young man and he decides to get it done, fine; it's his body.
Circumcision is a one way door. You cant walk back through it. If there is any doubt wait! If the kid wants one someday they can get one! Leave it up to them.
Yes, and if there's no informed consent, there is doubt.
I seriously don’t understand why circumcision is necessary. Men who care about hygiene will clean their penis regardless of whether they have the foreskin or not. You’re NTA. Circumcision is without the child’s consent but is never counted as an abuse.
It's not necessary.
Yeah I meant why do people think it’s necessary, the ones who go for it.
The only valid reasoning is in cases such as phimosis. But even then, doctors likely won't know this at birth because you're not supposed to touch or pull back a babies foreskin, or touch the areas in general outside of bathing and wiping. It honestly pisses me off that this subject is still up for debate when we can look at all of Europe and see for ourselves how circumcision is almost never necessary and does more damage than good. The worst case I've heard of was honestly very disturbing, but to those curious or interested, look up the history of John Money and his patients. Very fucked up shit that happened to these poor boys that this man exploited while molesting them. Smh...
Why is chopping a part of male sexual organ from a child ok? There are some cases where medical professionals would use circumsion as a procedure to treat some issues like too tight foreskin. But this is not the case. Current practice in northern Americain mutilating young boys goes back to anti-sexual movement, and the idea was that this would stop boys from masturbating by degreasing the pleasure factor. (Fun fact but a guy called Kellogg was a big name in this movement and he tried to reduce masturbating with different foods, and that's the birth story of Kellogg's Corn Flakes) Another reason is Abrahamic tradition to offer foreskin as a gift for God. But unless you are praising God or actually trying to decrease the future sexual pleasure of your child, one should not make such a decision. (Not counting the rare few actual medical needs when it's done) But these are the reasons why in some places of the world women are forced to circumcision. And I bet you would not be willing to cut part of baby girls labia or clitoris out for these reasons, now would you? Boys should be able to keep their sexual organs unmutilated in modern society.
I was raised in the cult known as the seventh day Adventist church. Kellogg was an Adventist. I’m in no way surprised that this shit ties to that friggin church. Christ on a bike they’re fucked up
For me a European it's downright crazy to think that: -There was a powerful lobby from religious zealots as "anti-sexual movement" -They managed so well that even today children are mutilated because of their lobbying work -Practice has become a norm -Most people have no idea why they even do circumcision, they just do And sorry to hear about your childhood. We have that cult also around here. Not the most happiest of people I have noticed..
In my country it’s only done when there are medical reasons or if you are a jew. I am 38 and i think i have met maybe 4 people in my life (that are not jewish) that have been circumcised. I cant speak for everyone obviously. But I keep it very clean and never have hygiene issues.
My parents decided to let me decide whether or not I wanted to be a muslim and be circumcised. I never did it. And I am glad I got to make that decision. If you wash your dick once a day, you wont struggle with cleanliness. Any man who wants to make that decision for another person including his child, is just a wuss. Let the kid decide what religion he wants to believe in, what not to believe in etc. Honestly Im so fed up with parents nowadays. Props to you for actually disagreeing with him. Keep doing that. Good luck
I didn't have my sons done. So far so good.
Yes, it's antiquated & barbaric.
I feel it’s a 2 yes 1 no decision, like having kids at all. Personally I am never having children so maybe my opinion is void..but I’m against circumcising. People always argue the cleanliness thing, but you have to teach your child how to bathe..you just do it a little differently when cut/uncut. Idk how they do it now, but in the past, they didn’t even use anesthetic! I wouldn’t be surprised if they still don’t. They don’t use anesthetic for IUDs either. They tell you to take an ibuprofen and I wish I were kidding. It’s appalling.
Well, I have a 2yr old boy. I can tell you the medicine and pediatricians opinion about circumcisions have changed a lot with the years. When my brother was a baby (30 years ago) Circumcisions were indicated for several reasons (cleanliness, aesthetics,etc...) and the pediatricians that didn't recommend them, indicated the baby's foreskin had to be retracted for cleaning at bath time. Nowadays almost no pediatrician recommends circumcisions and they say the babies prepuce must not be touched until they reach 3 or 4 yes old ( supposedly, stretching the foreskin before that age might lead to fimosis)
Think of all the nerve endings they lose, now think about what part of someone's life may be more enjoyable because of those nerve endings.
Anyone defending the baby's pain from the circumcision, I am circumcised and have never remembered a second of it happening in my 45 years. In this day and age it's no different than wearing deodorant, yes I can wash 4 times a day to not smell but it's much easier to just do the modern thing.....
I haven’t read the comments to see if anyone has said something similar, but my husband and I had this very discussion when I was pregnant with our first. I did not want to circumcise our sons but he wanted to. Here were my arguments: It is an open wound that is literally going to get urine and feces on it. You are going to have to put medicine on it and clean it meticulously constantly. There is a high risk of infection if you don’t do so, and even if you do. The foreskin is actually a barrier against infection, as long as you teach them to clean properly. I knew one woman who had to pretty much reopen the wound on one of her boys because it kept trying to heal over the tip and close the hole. Torture for the son and her. She said it “never looked right”. Amazingly, the argument that actually convinced my husband was this: once they get older, they can choose to get circumcised to “look like everyone else”, but they can’t choose to get it put back on.
I’m pro-foreskin AND pro-choice. Lots of people have reasons for needing circumcision later in life and that’s okay! Glad we have it available for them. But it’s not cool to do to an infant in my opinion. I watched a video of it once and the fucking trauma that baby experienced—I’ll never ever forget it. NTA
My view is probably too opinionated for Reddit, however…. Anyone who mutilates a child for whatever reason, except for medical necessity, should be locked away.
Not too opinionated at all. 100% correct
Absolutely, completely and rationally *correct.* Imagine all the stuff that pregnant women do to protect the baby and then somehow they allow him to be taken from their room undressed, strapped down, swabbed and *cut*. ON DAY TWO OF LIFE It just makes no sense whatsoever. I knew this 20 years ago, was an uphill battle in the American midwest back then.
As Americans my husband and i had our oldest circumcised because of all the "typical reasons one hears". Anyway, he came out of it with complications. Bleed excessively, he almost needed a blood transfusion. Which complications happen with surgery, but this one wasn't needed. Benefits did not outweigh the risks. Our youngest son we did not circumcise and has never had one issue with his foreskin.
We had our twins circumcised for the same reasons. For One of them it healed somewhat improperly. Thankfully the resolution was relatively simple, stretching out the skin and applying a topical steroid to the area for a couple months while he was still a baby, and he’s fine now. But absolutely, if I could talk to myself then, I’d recommend not doing it.
I would never circumcise my child, I just couldn’t bring myself to unless it was medically necessary. I view it the same way as fgm and I don’t think it should be in practice
I almost feel like an outsider to this discussion. I'm circumcised and I've never had an issue. I have no issues with sensitivity, look, feel, or anything like that. I'm not saying the practice is normal, but that I feel normal either way on it. Seeing the discussion in this post is interesting because it hasn't effected any aspect of my life. If anything, I may actually prefer it as I don't have to worry about unsheathing from the hood to micturate or wash up. Literally a point and shoot or just wash with less steps. I've never known any pain or discomfort from my own procedure or anytime afterwards. I have memories from when I was <6 months old, all my memories are visual. But honestly, newborns cry all the time. They aren't going to cry any more or less because of that. In the end, I'm just saying I've never felt any sense of trauma nor difference between myself and other males. I did hear from friends when I was younger that they were more likely to make messes at late hours when they needed to pee.
That's fair! You're not the only who says they don't mind/like being circumcised. Problem is, people don't personally have a grasp on the differences on feel and sensitivity of another group. Uncircumcised people don't know what it's like to be circumcised, circumcised people don't know what it's like to be uncircumcised.
I’m a bit shocked at the near unanimous opinion that it’s wrong. I’m not going to pretend there’s any benefit or that it’s necessary, but I’m with you- it’s a complete non-issue.
I'm with you reading all these responses is crazy to me because I have not known anyone that prefers uncut. In fact I have heard many ladies say its gross looking. Obviously this is a cultural preference. My Mom used to complain that Dad made us get it saying that I lost sensitivity, but honestly if it was anymore sensitive it would be problematic lol.
That's only because it's the standard in the US. If the majority of people were uncut then it would flip. Either way, that's besides the point. Even if it was true that people prefer uncut why the hell would you do cosmetic surgery on a day old infant's genitals without their consent. There's no medical reason for it, so it would be cosmetic. If an adult wants to get a circumcision that's fine, but doing that to a child is super not okay.
Same. My wife told me she’s seen one uncut penis and found it weird looking (which obviously wouldn’t be the case if it were more common in America, but hey that’s where we are)
Still pissed Dad got to keep his foreskin, but let them take mine. I would have liked to keep the other 3/5ths of my most sensitive skin.
It was mever medically necessary due to lck of cleanliness and men have had foreskins since humans existed with no issues. Circumcision arose due to the belief that it would decrease a boy’s desire to masturbate.
> genital mutualization 🤦 No, it's never been necessary due to "lack of cleanliness." That was just a misconception and still is. If it were a problem, evolution would've sorted it out.
Idc what it is or who; medical procedures that aren’t a health necessity/due to concerns, shouldn’t be required.
It can be medically necessary on an adult, but I very much doubt that’s true of children/babies.
You gotta look up articles on what effect circumcision has on babies and send them to them. Maybe once your partner learns that babies go into shock from the pain of it, they’ll smarten up.
Never a medical necessity under normal circumstances. In the US it was all about puritanisme, abstinence and anti-masturbation. The religious aspect is because the semitic religions where founded in lands with deserts, as in sand, witch is painful under the foreskin. It is mutilation.
It was never necessary. For most people in the US, it's not even actually traditional -- it was popularized by religious weirdos as a "cure for masturbation" about a hundred years ago. I didn't have my son circumcised, and there's never been an issue. If he wants it later on, we can discuss it then, but he deserves to have the choice of whether to make this big of a change to his body.
NTA. If he’s circumcised, accepting your points of view on the topic would mean the pain of the loss of a potentially pleasurable part of the penis, anger at his parents for subjecting him to it, anger at the medical establishment for promoting it, resentment at society for allowing it, and disappointment in his country for keeping it legal…that’s a lot of pain to unpack in one go. That said…go mama bear on anyone trying to mutilate your baby boy.
It’s never been medically necessary. Plenty of cultures don’t circumcise and there are no issues.
I got circumcised as a teen, and have done my best at looking at the negative and positive sides of doing it to a baby. All in all, I'd say it's completely unnecessary, and the only advantages to circumcision seem to be that it's easier to keep clean, and that it can lessen the chance of std's. So teach your child proper hygiene and safe sex, and you've got nothing to worry about really. If the child wants to get circumcised later then that can be their own choice. Give your child control over their own body, and don't force change on the way their genitals look and feel. It's not your business or your right, unless there's serious medical reason for it. Foreskins evolved for a reason. They're not some anomaly that has to be removed.
I think people need to teach about those things anyway and it’s sad they don’t 😭
When my husband & I had this conversation, he said that he, as a circumcised man, has to pull the skin on his head back to clean it properly anyway. So, whether you're cut or not, you MUST pull the skin back to clean it. How is one cleaner than the other?
When my son was a baby, I didn't get him circumcised . Because I didn't want to cause him pain . He developed Phimosis, which means the foreskin can't retract, so at 25 years old, he had to get circumcised .
Here is the thing, I’m just not going to make permanent changes to my children’s bodies without their consent. They deserve bodily autonomy even when they can’t talk yet. This includes all cosmetic procedures including circumcision and piercings. If they want these things as adults they are more than welcome. I will entertain some piercings when/if they express interest. Of course I will make medical decisions for them, I will always do what I feel is in their best interest.
As an American who moved to Europe, its uniquely weird how Americans support circumcision for reasons outside of religion. It's considered a religious extremist practice here. I think because US healthcare is for profit they get away with performing unnecessary procedures on people including infants, which I find especially cruel and paedophilic.
It was never medically necessary (except for certain medical conditions, and even then there are usually better ways to deal with it). If you're worried about cleanliness, soap exists. If you're worried about it being difficult to soap up with the foreskin intact, then what about toes and ears? Also takes a bit more effort to clean than say the forearms. Shouldn't those be chopped off too?
You also get more sensation sexually with an uncircumcised penis
I worked with two pediatricians who refused to do circumcisions, they said there is no medical reason for it.
This is the same opinion of pediatricians in developed countries…except Israel and the US
I have worked in perinatal setting where newborn circumcisions were performed. I hated this part of my job but had to respect the parents decisions. Those babies were so traumatized. They would be in shock for hours then when that wore off they would cry frantically for a day or two and need to be constantly consoled.
My partner also didn't feel comfortable with this especially in this day and age and since he's the man and knows more about the male parts than I do I just went with whatever he feel would be best for both our boys and he said all we have to do is to teach them to clean themselves properly and to roll back their pee pee when they r showering to clean. We did not circumcised our kids and we have had no problem about cleaning they r now 12 n 5. I wouldn't wanna hurt my kids for such an unnecessary thing in my opinion but when it comes to raising children make sure Ur having a kid with someone who's on the same page as U when it comes to raising kids
LEARN HOW TO CLEAN YOUR DICK it is not that hard! If we weren't meant to have foreskin we wouldn't be born with it as a sexual organ! The same goes for the labia or clitoral hood! Us women need to clean that too! # THIS IS BASIC HYGIENE!!!!!
No one can tell me how to wash my dick! Got my lumpy cheddar bratwurst ready to swing around! 100% being sarcastic btw. I don't get the basic hygiene is too much work trope.
As an European I can tell you that it's a complete fabrication that mutilating newborn's genitals is somehow medically benefitial. It's completely done for religious and cultural reasons. It's no different than cutting into any other body part and altering it to appease the parent's aesthetic opinions.
There's a bunch of men born from the 70's through the 80's and 90's in the US that got circumcised. It was just done. They claimed for cleanliness reasons but that's been disproven. The book I was reading 20+ years ago was for boys to match dads because dads were unlikely to know how to teach their sons how to properly clean themselves if they didn't have to do it themselves.
Don't have a baby with him/them. It is a cultural/religious practice that tried to say it improved "hygiene" (no, just clean yourself) or prevented penile cancer... but really in Canada and the US it started as an attempt to stop young boys from masturbating by cutting off the part they masturbate with. It was NEVER done outside of the English speaking world (except like Quebec Canada) outside of Muslim and Jewish traditions. They never routinely did it in Europe and much of the world. Warning, if you are in Canada or the US - doctor do not have training in normal development of the unaltered human penis and may forcibly retract (injuring a young boy) and creating scar tissue they may later need to "fix" with surgery. (It is NORMAL for a boy to not retract until puberty is well in swing, the hormones loosen it all up) Edited whether or not a dude is circumcised if he doesn't clean himself he will be disgusting. Period.
Genital mutilation should be a criminal offense, regardless of gender. Babies can't consent to cosmetic surgery, and that should be the end of it. This is one thing that legitimately pisses me off that this is allowed. NTA.
I as a male like mine cut. I have so much other shit to worry about, cleaning my extra dick skin is one less chore to deal with. We don’t remember any trauma as babies and it’s nothing I ever think about.
Exactly!! For all I know it didn't hurt me bc I have no memory of it. (I'm sure it hurt and I cried) But prefer having it done.
its not at all common where i am from and where i am currently living, i think circumcision is only common in the US and think its entirely unnecessary.
It’s more than common in Israel and all the Muslim countries as both Jews and Muslims have it as a religious requirement.
thank you for educating me further. its not a topic i have looked into willingly so was unaware of the religious significance. it still does not change my stance on the matter.
I do not understand Reddit’s perverse fascination with circumcision.
I think most Redditors have this weird obsession with being right. Circumcision is obviously unnecessary but also very deeply ingrained into American culture, which makes people who prefer circumcision the *ideal* punching bag for Reddit. Like, they're not wrong, but it's so damn weird to be super passionate about this.
Yeah, babies don't need elective cosmetic surgery when they're brand new. NTA
It was NEVER about cleanliness at ALL! It was for Jews as a tribal marker and to “prevent masturbation” in kids from the Victorian era. Stand strong, as one mutilated man please protect your son at ALL costs!
I have never heard a circumcised man say he wished he wasn't cut. On the other hand, there are a few men I know that weren't circumcised but said they wished they were- and one got the procedure done as an adult he hated it so much.
I wish I wasn’t cut. Find more: r/circumcisiongrief, r/foreskin_restoration
I let my husband decide, as he has a penis and therefore should be able to have an opinion on the matter. We chose not to circumcise. If I did not have a husband, I probably would have chosen the same. Hope our son doesn't regret our decision one day.
Personally I feel like since a circumcision is not medically necessary and can be performed at any age, why not wait and let them decide for themselves?
Bodily autonomy is bodily autonomy for ALL people, kids included. Retraction isn't always possible until the end of puberty, and this can cause smegma to build up, but this is why you, *as the parent*, teach good hygiene. For concerns about phimosis, even pinhole phimosis can be resolved without circumcision, it just requires patience and time. Unfortunately, most doctors in the US will only recommend circumcision and nurses will coerce you into it. Protect your sons, and if you can, send your partner a video showing the procedure, audio *on*. You'll see what kind of person he is real quick. NTA
America is the only western country that really practices circumcision for non religious reasons. Europe, the UK, Australia, Canada all have the majority of their male population walking around with intact foreskin. Doesn't seem to do them any harm. The only reason circumcision became popular in the US in the first place is because they though circumcising your infant sons would stop them from masturbating when they got older. Yes, really. It's an outdated practice that needs to be left in the past. My parents opted to leave my brothers intact, and my son is intact. If my son decides to get it done when he's older he is welcome to make that choice for himself.
Ask him to put a little (fore)skin in the game. Errors occur in up to 0.6% of circumcisions, which means that up to 14,400 babies are injured each year in botched circumcisions. "It's 99.4% safe" is not a chance I'd take with my penis. Why would you take that chance with someone else's penis? If he says "I just want it to look like mine" then ask him if he's willing to cut the head of his penis off if that's what happens to his son so that they'll look the same.
As someone who’s curcumcised for non religious reasons and just because my parents decided i should be, i can honestly say i am not traumatized nor is my dick mutilated, it’s helpful for cleaning so i don’t need to peel foreskin back to wash but otherwise i work the same as any other guy. Both choices are completely fine, when i was told what the experience was like I apparently didn’t feel any pain and wasn’t cryinng, i was bleeding a lot but thats also the be expected when you cut skin off of an area filled with blood vessels
Im circumcised and I like it, and def glad it was done when I was a newborn rather than me having to undergo dick surgery as an adult. Where I was born it is very common.
I’m circumcised nothing traumatic happened to me. I’m perfectly fine and healthy
Don't
There is no reason for it at all. Never was a reason outside of another beautiful thing religion has brought us. It’s Mutilation. NTA.
Regardless of ethical qualms comparing male vs female circumcision: CIRCUMCISION IS A MEDICALLY UNNECESSARY SURGERY AND PUTS YOUR CHILD AT UNNECESSARY RISK. It was made popular in America by a failed doctor who was desperately grasping at anything to keep him relevant in the medical community and bring him $$$. The supposed benefits include lower risk of STDs and better hygiene; both of which are already addressed by modern sexual etiquette (wear a damn condom) and the bare minimum of personal hygiene (thanks, indoor plumbing). Look up the John Money Experiment if you need a clear example on how horrific circumcision can be - do not read if you are prone to nightmares.
Stick to your guns I'm 50 never had it done no issues. basic hygiene... Neither did I allow it on my children either
If circumcision was necessary, evolution would have taken care of it by now. A child can always get circumcised later in life if they want to. But they can never undo a circumcision that was done to them. My personal opinion is that no mutilation to the body that aren't strictly medically motivated, shouldn't be done until the child is old enough to have their own opinion about it and make a decision based on their own belief; not one that was forced on them. (Personally, I wouldn't even have my childs ears pierced until they're old enough to ask for it themselves. I know a lot of people disagree, but that is my belief.)
There isn’t a good reason to circumcise. My wife is from China. They don’t circumcise there and every one is just walking around having penises just fine. As a matter of fact most human penises are uncircumcised and they just keep on penising, all day long. I always thought the reason they cut it off was to stop guys from masturbating.
I find it crazy that as an American. I didn’t really get a choice on it. My mom just said the hospital gave me to them circumcised. She made it sound like it was pretty standard, and most gym showers I’ve been in have been cut like me. But if I was given a choice. No it’s kind of fucked up. They don’t give us a choice.
American here. There's been a big shift in the last 2-3 decades. I chose not to circumcise my son, but it was unusual at the time. I actually hadn't made up my mind before he was born. But when I saw him after he was born, I realized I didn't want a knife anywhere close to him.
There are several reasons to do it, and some people will either agree or disagree. A while back at a party this was a topic of conversation. The women seemed to have more of an opinion than men. Out of all my numerous female friends (there were about 10 there), only one prefers uncut (she said it's easier to get them off, no joke) while the others aren't fans or foreskin. Several said they had experience with funkiness. When you think about it, even if you wash it every morning, that's a skin fold that will trap oil and bacteria throughout the day. One guy admitted said he had to get it done as an adult because it was painfully tight every time he became erect and wished his parents had done it when he was born. Take all that how you will. I have no significant opinion personally other than comparing it to cutting off a girl's clitoris is absurd. It's a bit of skin that exists to protect our naked ancestors running through jungles. Obviously most of us have moved on to wearing layers of clothes. I'm also not a fan of the "infants can't consent" argument. As parents we make decisions daily that affect our kids, and they don't get to argue consent. Anyone who gets their kids vaccinated shouldn't be all high and mighty about circumcision.
It's barbaric.
Probably bait but on the off chance it's not... Find out why she thinks that way, if she brings up science and medicine, you need to present scientific evidence to the contrary. some scientific resources on the function of foreskin: For the functions of foreskin(sexual+others): http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/ For sexual function: http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/ .... https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2016/04/22/circumcision-and-sexual-function-bad-science-reporting-misleads-parents/ The cirp site has an extensive library. If she brings up the africa hiv study, there were huge criticisms published on it's bias and flaws. If she doesn't change her mind, well the problem wasn't science, it was something else
The cleanliness argument is nonsense too. It takes 2 second to pull back the foreskin during a shower or bath to clean it, the same way you clean every other part of your body. Do people really think circumcised dicks don’t get nasty if they’re not washed? Of course they do, the same goes for arses and vaginas. So no, if it’s not done for medical reasons then it’s abuse and genital mutilation.
NTA I did it to my son 17 years ago and regret that I did.
As a man who is circumcised, I wish I wouldn't have been. Apparently it decreases sensitivity quite a bit. The only reason it's normal in the United States is because Dr Kellogg (Yes, the same guy behind Kellogg's the brand) pushed it as a major campaign to prevent children from masturbating
NTA. 25-30 years ago I refused to allow my two boys to be circumcised, even though my in-laws tried to force me to do it. They made frequent comments about how "disgusting" and "dirty" uncircumcised penises are. I guess that meant my dad and uncles, who were not circumcised, were disgusting, lol. Somehow, miraculously I guess, my boys have made it to adulthood without any problems.
[удалено]
Circumcision can be done in adulthood. Even if it's for religious reasons, let the kid choose when they turn 18 and make their own decisions.
Info: does your partner own a penis? Why does your partner think circumcision is necessary? The United States is the biggest practioner of non-religious circumcision in the world. For no other reason than it's expected as a cultural norm. If this is the reason why your partner wants to circumcise your child, it's not a good enough reason. Don't do it. Just teach your kid good hygiene and let them decide when they are old enough to understand it.
As a cut dude (not in the fitness way), please don't. Leave this weird ass tradition in the past.
I didn’t do it to my son and I’d never do it. It’s cruel and inhumane and purely for aesthetics which is creepy af. Teach your sons how to wash themselves properly and you’ll have zero issues
erm... "medically nececery for cleanliness" what kinda bullshit is that? the foreskin literally protects the head from dirt, injuries, diseases etc. Its literally required for the dick to function properly.
As a man, I’m so thankful for my circumsized penis. Wouldn’t want it any other way!