BS: Circumcision: pros and cons

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: gnu
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 02:47 PM

Hmmm... I guess my next question might be better asked of a doctor practicing in this area, but, I'll ask it anyway. Can the "uncut" penis of an infant be easily fully exposed for washing?

I apologize for my ignorance here, but, it would seem to me that herein lies the crux of the biscuit. (Seriously, I don't remember... and, I got a member. I just don't remember.)

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 02:52 PM

The mom or dad or both have to wash junior all over anyway. Pulling back the foreskin on his pecker is no more a task than washing under the arms, the bum or the tootsies.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 02:58 PM

There are a whole range of different procedures that can be termed "female circuncision", including some which are relately analogous to male circumcision, and others which are far more drastic.

While in some cultures they have becomne customary, fortunately they are not actually prescribed by any significant religion - the pity is that that isn't the case with male circumcision. (Which also comes in a number of varieties, some much worse than others.)

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 04:48 PM

..."Can the "uncut" penis of an infant be easily fully exposed for washing?"...

I can only speak for myself, but I had difficulty for years as a young boy in pulling the foreskin back to wash.

Constant practice made it easier ...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 04:55 PM

It's yours, and you can wash it as fast as you want.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: gnu
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 05:09 PM

GUEST at 04:48PM... Ummmm... that's what I am getting at... ah, getting to... ah, well, okay... can the foreskin be easily "rolled back" to completely expose ALL surfaces for washing? GUEST may be on to something here which may be of great significance in this "debate". That is, until well into puberty, many males CANNOT roll out the wash.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: michaelr
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 05:09 PM

Let's get back to the topic, shall we?

I think we can all agree that female circumcision is a cruel, senseless form of mutilation, and that it is doubtless much worse than malecircumcision.

It is also not the issue here. I started this thread for a discussion about male circumcision as practiced in the US.

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: michaelr
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 05:12 PM

Oh, and we've all heard the joke about the luggage/couch/whatever. Several times, now.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 05:15 PM

michaelr

There are scads of sites that address the issue of which you speak. Don't castigate people because they have some fun while addressing things on YOUR thread. I am outta here. Y'all have a nice day.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,GUEST 4:48
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 05:23 PM

Gnu's question is a very valid and important one.

Does any uncircumcised male reading this have difficulty retracting the foreskin, or is it something that all men are able to accomplish in time?

In particular, are they able to retract fully while having an erection ? The reason I ask is because I would imagine that there would be no bigger turn-off for a woman than an unretractable foreskin on their partner's penis.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bbc
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 05:58 PM

Difficulty retracting the foreskin varies, but it's not usually a problem. One of my son's had an easily retractable foreskin fairly early on & one didn't until into puberty. He's had sex as a young man w/ no problem & both of my sons are glad they weren't circumcised. One is convinced it will make sex more fun for him & his partner, which some sources seems to agree w/. He's the one who hasn't had sex yet, so we can't be sure. You are not supposed to force the foreskin back--just retract it gently. Cleanliness was never an issue w/ my sons. When they were small, I cleaned all of their body parts. As they got older--what do you know!--they did it themselves. Duh. I made the decision not to circumcise my firstborn when he had to, unexpectedly, start his life in neonatal intensive care. I didn't see why he needed more trauma. I was leaning that way, anyway, the procedure being medically unnecessary. Once one of my sons was uncircumcised, it seemed silly to circumcise the younger.

bbc

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 06:09 PM

"The strange thing is how this rather odd cultural idiosyncracy became common practice in the USA in a secular context, whereas in most parts of the world it has been more or less confined to the field of religious ritual."

Ah, but then for a significant segment of the population in the U.S. of A. being an Ahmerikun IS a religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 07:06 PM

Michael, here's an interesting study showing how male circumcision enhances sexual performance and satisfaction

"CONCLUSIONS: Adult circumcision does not adversely affect sexual function. The increase in the ejaculatory latency time can be considered an advantage rather than a complication."

This increase in "ejaculatory latency time" is due to What is Lost in Circumcision

"1. The frenar band of soft ridges--the single most pleasure producing zone on the male body. Loss of this densely innervated and reactive belt of tissue reduces the sensitivity of the remaining penis to about that of ordinary skin."

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 07:36 PM

So how come the cult of Americanism apparently adopted this rather uncomfortable ritual?

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 08:04 PM

"Yes, there are medical benefits to circumcision"

Some keep saying that but have yet to provide a SINGLE example...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 08:09 PM

There are medical benefits. Some doctors charge $400 for the procedure.


Info available here.


Other views.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 08:31 PM

My banjo string went when I was 15,with a young lady at the time. It scared hell out of me. Nobody told he it could happen, very sore may I add. Then again a good Irish Catholic boy shouldn't have known !

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 08:33 PM

Circumcision provides for a lifetime of enhanced sexual function and satisfaction, because removal of hte foreskin causes a significant "increase in ejaculatory latency time". (See the link I just posted above).

In addition, here are some of the medical benefits of male circumcision:

"...a boy circumcised as a newborn has multiple lifetime health advantages compared to one with an �intact� foreskin. These include protection against serious kidney infections in infancy, sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) including human immunodeficiency (HIV) infections and human papilloma virus (HPV) in young men, and invasive cancer of the penis in middle and old age.

In addition, all through life uncircumcised males are more susceptible to penile infections (balanoposthitis) and a variety of skin disorders of the penis such as eczema and psoriasis, as well as more difficulty maintaining good hygiene.

About 1% of boys are born with only a pinpoint opening at the tip of the foreskin (phimosis) preventing retraction, leading to painful erections, and requiring future circumcision, at a time when the procedure is more difficult, risky and costly.

Further, women sexual partners of uncircumcised men with HPV infection are at significantly greater risk of developing cervical cancer."

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 08:55 PM

I may be wrong but I can't think of any other medical procedure where a portion of the anatomy is removed, without the consent of the patient, as a preventitive against the possibility of some future complication.

An equivalent of this would be removing the labia of a female to prevent the possibility of labial cancer or reducing the risk of urinary tract infection.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 09:18 PM

WEll, I rather doubt removal of the labia enhances sexual function/satisfication. And for many people(s), male circumcision affords significant social (ie family, religious, cultural) and psychological benefit, in addition to better health/hygiene.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:28 PM

"WEll, I rather doubt removal of the labia enhances sexual function/satisfication."

I didn't see anyone making that claim but I suspect you are inferring from the opinion that removal of the foreskin increases "ejaculatory latency time" whatever that is supposed to mean.

The foreskin and the labia are rich in nerve endings which promote sexual response so to say that the removal of either enhances sexual function/satisfaction is a specious argument at best.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:39 PM

Today (Oct. 15, 2005) The New York Times published an editorial titled "Preventing the Spread of AIDS."

The editorial promotes circumcision as a powerful protector against AIDS. The results of a new study in South Africa are summarized. It is suggested that the penis's foreskin has cells that are particularly receptive to the AIDS virus.

Preventing the Spread of AIDS

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: dianavan
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:48 PM

Wouldn't it just be easier to wear a condom?

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:51 PM

Having a foreskin does not make one susceptible to HIV, high risk sexual behaviour, among other activities, does.

It's like saying women should have their cervixes or vaginas removed as that would reduce the risk of HPV.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:55 PM

Removal of the vagina or the cervix would be a better contraceptive, though ...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,Ladies: Does It Matter?
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:07 PM

Okay, has a woman here had sex with a "clad" gentleman and one that was "skinned"? Could you tell the difference? Was one "better" than the other?

We need the sexual "skinney" on the subject.

Skinned Alive (as a babe)

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:23 PM

Or is a dildo or a vibrator or the middle finger more effective?
Ho Hum.
Or let Fido do it.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: dianavan
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:43 PM

Again - its the rights of the child the matter.

If an adult chooses cirmumcision - for whatever reason - it is a personal decision and is based on informed consent. A child does not have that choice therefore, circumcision is sexual assault of a child.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,The Ridged Band
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:53 PM

The Inside Skinney (or, Know Thy Prepuce

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 12:49 AM

Clinton, the medical benefits have already mentioned above, but here they are again. One is a documented decrease in the incidence of cervical cancer in the partners of circumcised men. The other is a documented decrease in the incidence of urinary tract infections (including pyelonephritis, or infection of the kidney, and urosepsis, or bloodstream infection starting in the urinary tract, both of which can be fatal) in circumcised male infants under one year of age. Again, does that justify circumcision? Not necessarily. Would it justify it in the mind of someone whose child had a severe or even fatal urinary tract infection? You bet your bippy, but that's not how public policy is made.

To answer the question about bathing baby: In a small number of boys, the foreskin is retractable at birth. In most, it's firmly attached to the glans--removing these adhesions to loosen the foreskin is half of the circumcision procedure in a newborn. It becomes retractable in most boys some time between infancy and puberty--yes, that's a very wide window. Until it is easily retractable, it should not be forcibly pulled back. Once it is easily retractable, it should be pulled back and the glans cleaned on a regular basis.

There will be a short quiz next week.

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Terry K
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 06:39 AM

There are no pros, it's all a con.

Everyone associated has been conned by the generation before them. It's all to do with superstition and the mindless perpetuation of a mythology that no thinking person could ever subscribe to.

I would advocate that the perpetrators stop mutilating children.

Other than that, I don't really hold any strong views on the issue.

cheers, Terry

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 08:11 AM

Mark

If the cervixes of females were removed that would reduce the incidence of cervical cancer in them also.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 09:36 AM

Sorry folks, you do sound quite convincing, but your arguments against male circumsion just doesn't hold up (hee hee!) in real life.

I've yet to meet a hoodless male who harboured any "issues" whatsoever around his long-lost foreskin, or considered himself "abused", "mutilated", or otherwise inconvenienced in any way.

In fact, they seem quite proud, not to mention fond of their aesthetically pleasing, smegma-free, well-sculpted appendages.

Likewise, the hooded males I've known seem equally pleased with their parts and prowess. However, I've heard a more than a few complaints about being afflicted with occasional-to-regular bouts of itchy, over-sensitive "sticky dicky" (also known, in some intimate circles, as "stinky-dinky").

As for sexual function and satisfaction, I think there IS something to to be said for that increase in "latent ejaculatory time". It's a case of one partner's loss becoming both partner's gain. However, since human sexual performance/satisfaction are a function of so much more than nerve endings, it's nothing to write home to mama about imo.

And as for circumcision being "sexual assault of a child", I suppose that depends on personal opinion + prevailing family/community/religious/cultural norms and laws. There are many instances where neglecting to circumcise a child constitutes real social, psychological, and yes sexual abuse. For one example, check out these ancient, lavish social traditions:

Traditional Anatolian (Turkish) Marriage and Circumcision Rituals

Circumcision is an operation in which the foreskin of the penis is removed. It is a practice of great religious significance. Circumcision is known to have been practiced in ancient Egypt even before it was introduced to the Jews as part of Allah's covenant with Abraham. In Islam, however, the authority for circumcision came not from the Qur'an but from the example of the Prophet Mohammed. In Islam, whatever the prophet does or says is called sunnet; therefore this word stands for circumcision in modern Turkish.

Urologists claim that circumcised males have far fewer urinary tract infections and are less at risk for catching sexually transmitted diseases than are uncircumcised males.

As an Islamic country, in Turkey all Moslem boys are circumcised between the ages 2-14 by licensed circumcising surgeons. From the social point of view, the most prominent feature of circumcision is the introduction of a child to his religious society as a new member. This explains the reason for circumcision of people who convert into Moslems as a first step. It is impressed on a boy at a very early age that circumcision is a step for transition to manhood. As long as they are accepted as very important events in people's lives, circumcisions are generally made with big ceremonies in festive atmosphere...

Interesting, too, that the 2002 study I posted suggesting functional and satisfaction benefits of circumcision was carried out in a Turkish university.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,joe
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 09:40 AM

I wrote in a previous thread that circumcision causes very little pain - at least that was my experience a year ago. That's not to say it's ok to cut babies who have no choice in the matter. The "preventing problems in later life" argument doesn't hold up . Nobody talks about removing a kid's appendix so why a foreskin? The only reasons for the circumcision of minors can be religious or cultural ones.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 09:40 AM

A woman expert/authority on male circumcision.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 10:15 AM

"The only reasons for the circumcision of minors can be religious or cultural ones."

I agree with the above statement and question why most societies readily accept this rationale for males but are horrified when it is applied to females.

The reasons presented in this forum have been predicated on the degree of mutilation. What is the standard for an acceptable degree of non-consensual mutilation?

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 10:52 AM

Good point, bobad. I don't think it would be frivilous to bring in pierced ears at this juncture. Many kids--mostly girl kids--have their ears pierced before they reach the age of majority.

Mutilation is mutilation is mutilation . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,'Cat protecting her family's privacy
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 10:54 AM

My immediate family features exclusively hoodless males. None consider themselves mutilated or abused. All are potent, virile, fully functional, happy and healthy.

And stinky-dinky? Whassat??

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:03 AM

" the medical benefits have already mentioned above"
And they're all dismissed by reams and reams of reputable medical opinion and research...

"The only reasons for the circumcision of minors can be religious or cultural ones."
And those reasons are wrong... plain and simple...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:05 AM

OK, and . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:21 AM

Well, bobad, I'd consider this mutilation. But I bet he doesn't!

Prolonged, patient, well-intentioned "education" and/or ridicule would most likely cure him, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:44 AM

PS if you're hoodless, and feeling victimized or bereft for the first time in your life after persuing this thread, you might find this comforting. (WARNING - not for the faint-hearted)

J: Story of a Subincision

Scroll down the bottom of the page for rationale, commentary and photos.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:53 AM

Pretty pics, but I don't see what point you are trying to make.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 12:02 PM

PS if you're hoodless, and feeling victimized or bereft for the first time in your life after persuing this thread, you might find this comforting. (WARNING - not for the faint-hearted)

Shes more interested in the subject than I

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 12:37 PM

Much better to leave such procedures until the people concerned have grown up and can decide for themselves, leaving aside the rare cases where there is some genuine abnormality that needs to be corrected.

One thing I hadn't realised until looking something up for this thread is that there is nothing in the Koran requiring circumcision of male Muslims. In a way it's more of a cultural tradition than a formal requirement. There are some Muslims who are opposed to circumcision of children and babies, on religious and ethical grounds. (See here).

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 12:45 PM

Peace, I posted those links to illustrate the HUGE individual and cultural differences in what is considered to be physically beautiful and desirable - or horrific and abusive.   

What Brazilian natives do to their lips, or other people(s) do to their genitals may be judged as horrific or abusive by Westerners raised with a very different set of cultural biases - but not by the people themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 02:12 PM

What people do to themselves is one thing. What things they do to their children or their babies is another thing. Whether it's a matter or surgery or sex, the same kind of principle applies.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 02:24 PM

Hey, you know what? I have a suspicion that we're not going to come to an agreement on this. Still, that's not likely to stop everybody from beating each other over the head about it (so to speak). Oh, well...

Aloha,
Mark

PS, Clinton, since reading medical literature is part of what I do for a living, I'd be interested in seeing some specific references to the "reams and reams of reputable medical literature" that dismisses those two very limited claims. I'm not familiar with any, but would be happy to know about them.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,nameless guest #5766
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 02:47 PM

According to McGrath of Harlow (16 Oct 05 - 12:37 PM): One thing I hadn't realised until looking something up for this thread is that there is nothing in the Koran requiring circumcision of male Muslims.

I'm no expert on Islam, but I do know that male circumcision is required in Judaism. I also know that in McGrath of Harlow has said in Middle East threads that Judaism and Islam are essentially the same religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 03:01 PM

As usual McGrath, you have linked us to a most informative article.