snopes.com Post new topic  New Poll  Post a reply
search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello snopes.com » Non-UL Chat » NFBSK Gone Wild! » Delicate choice just got tougher (Page 0)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Delicate choice just got tougher
Missy_pooh1997
Cauliflower Ears


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Missy_pooh1997   E-mail Missy_pooh1997   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes Gibbie you are right. The idea of a needle in a private part though makes my liver quiver. ***shudder in horror***

--------------------
"People do it everyday, they talk to themselves...they see themselves as they'd like to be,they dont have the courage you have, to just run with it".

Posts: 150 | From: St. Louis area | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Methuselah
Happy Holly Days


Icon 215 posted      Profile for Methuselah     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by missy_poo1997:
I started to research this when I was pregnant the first time before knowing I was having a girl. i found lots of cites under a search for circumsision that made me not want that to happen to my child. The main reasons where supposedly for cleanliness, lowered risk of STD's, and lower risk of penile and prostate cancers. America is pretty much the only country that performs this procedure and we only have a small percentage of difference in cancer levels. I read that circumsision became popular in puritanical society to reduce "sinful" masturbation by removing nerve rich foreskin and is a totally unneccesary thing.

There are many problems that males have as adults that are a result of circumsision and they have no idea. This includes penile papules, severe pain during erection, Skin eruptions and shedding after frequent or vigorous intercourse, and even penis lose.

Also when I had my dd I was in a teaching hospital that is in the top 10% of the nation for obstetrics. When I asked a nurse, on our prebirth tour, about the procedure she informed me that any numbing meds had only become popular in the last 15 years and that they had only ised it for the last 6 years. When I said it seemed barbaric she gives me this incredulous look and says "well it's not like they'll remember it".

I really did want to bow out of the thread, because I had stated all of my opinion so very recently in this discussion. But I feel it necessary to respond here.

The US is most definitely NOT the only country to perform circumcision.

The minute difference in penile cancer rates is because penile cancer is extremely rare to begin with.

Circumcision was NOT made popular in puritanical society to reduce masturbation. There is no evidence to support the assertion that a circumcised penis is less sensitive than an uncircumcised penis.

Health reasons had been a major factor for circumcision in prior decades, particularly for Australians. Balanitis was highly prevalent in soldiers serving in desert environments during WWI and WWII, and it became the standard that soldiers were pre-emptively circumcised, and the choice that their children then be circumcised. That is no longer the prevailing attitude.

The main reason for circumcision is as a religious and cultural practice. It is part of the Abrahamic Covenant as laid out in the Torah. It is part of the Hadith for the Islamic faiths. And it is in the Bible as followed by varioius orthodox denominations of christianity. Those three faiths make up a vast majority of the world. That is why circumcision was "popularized". Even if a majority of those people choose to not follow every edict of their faith, it is the basis for the practice of circumcision. If they choose to continue the tradition, it is their right.

As far as trying to make circumcision a medical issue...if you can provide any statistics on the supposed "problems" that you listed, I'd love to see them. The health issues faced solely by those who have been circumcised are no more prevalent than the health issues faced solely by those who have not been circumcised (most commonly phimosis, paraphimosis, and balanitis...aside from an increased chance of various cancers and STDs)

To sum up...circumcision is simply not a medical issue. There is no compelling evidence to deny people the right to follow their religious or cultural practices in this instance, as there is no proof that the procedure causes undo harm or that the risks outweigh the benefits.

--------------------
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 1514 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Bug Muldoon
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Bug Muldoon   E-mail Bug Muldoon   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Circumcision was NOT made popular in puritanical society to reduce masturbation. There is no evidence to support the assertion that a circumcised penis is less sensitive than an uncircumcised penis.
Loss of nerve endings = loss of sensitivity; though this does not even need to be proven to dismantle your objection, since the belief that that sensitivity decreased does exist and did motivate such a decision.

quote:
That is why circumcision was "popularized". Even if a majority of those people choose to not follow every edict of their faith, it is the basis for the practice of circumcision. If they choose to continue the tradition, it is their right.
Prove that the vast majority of circumcisions today are performed solely for religious reasons.

quote:
As far as trying to make circumcision a medical issue...if you can provide any statistics on the supposed "problems" that you listed, I'd love to see them.
Statistics are, in this case, superfluous (though I'm sure I could find some). The simple fact is that while circumcised babies are subjected to a medical procedure with small but real risk of infection and anesthesia complications; uncircumcised babies are not. Ergo, circumcision is infinitely riskier compared to non-circumcision's risk of, well, zero.

quote:
To sum up...circumcision is simply not a medical issue.
It is a medical procedure. As such, it is subject to the criteria for medical procedures, which state clearly that elective medical procedures are not to be undertaken on a non-consenting patient.

quote:
There is no compelling evidence to deny people the right to follow their religious or cultural practices in this instance, as there is no proof that the procedure causes undo harm or that the risks outweigh the benefits.
This proof has been given multiple times and ignored. Additionally, religion and tradition end where undue harm begins - and circumcision is weel beyond that line.

--------------------
All along the untrodden paths of the future, I can see the footprints of an unseen hand.

Posts: 6912 | From: Flanders | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Oualawouzou
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Oualawouzou     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as trying to make circumcision a medical issue...if you can provide any statistics on the supposed "problems" that you listed, I'd love to see them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics are, in this case, superfluous (though I'm sure I could find some). The simple fact is that while circumcised babies are subjected to a medical procedure with small but real risk of infection and anesthesia complications; uncircumcised babies are not. Ergo, circumcision is infinitely riskier compared to non-circumcision's risk of, well, zero.

I'm curious of statistics about various diseases between circucised and non-circumsized men and I don't think it is superfluous to ask for them.

Vaccines have a risk of complications, yet I do not see many people pushing for their abolition on kids too young to give consent. That's because the risks of catching and suffering grave consequences from some diseases outweights the risks brought by the medical procedure of vaccination. Hence, vaccination is made available.

--------------------
Le champignon arrive.

Posts: 4372 | From: Quebec | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
trollface
The Bills of St. Mary's


Icon 1 posted      Profile for trollface   Author's Homepage   E-mail trollface   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bored and Dangerous, with tinsel:
I wish to God (and I'm an atheist) that people would shush about it--[...]

So...don't read these threads?

--------------------
seriously , everyone on here , just trys to give someone crap about something they do !! , its shitting me to tears.

Posts: 16061 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Nocturnal Emissions Test
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Nocturnal Emissions Test     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Thank goodness that I am never having children but I do have a question.
I asked my mother why she got my brother's circumcised and she replied 'because I don't want them to be self-conscious after seeing daddy's pee-pee (when he is showing them how to do the stand-up thing, as all fathers do)'

So, how do you break the cycle? I do agree with my mom because my very curious nieces and nephew are always asking questions like 'why do you sit when you pee?' or 'how come daddy has this but mommy has that?'

--------------------
Danielle

Posts: 282 | From: Muggy Chicago | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Methuselah
Happy Holly Days


Icon 07 posted      Profile for Methuselah     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bug Muldoon:
quote:
Circumcision was NOT made popular in puritanical society to reduce masturbation. There is no evidence to support the assertion that a circumcised penis is less sensitive than an uncircumcised penis.
Loss of nerve endings = loss of sensitivity; though this does not even need to be proven to dismantle your objection, since the belief that that sensitivity decreased does exist and did motivate such a decision.
And a cite showing that puritans circumcised for this reason can be found where?

The objection was to the assertion that circumcision would reduce sensitivity to the point that masturbation would lose all appeal. Is that the assertion your supporting here?

quote:
quote:
That is why circumcision was "popularized". Even if a majority of those people choose to not follow every edict of their faith, it is the basis for the practice of circumcision. If they choose to continue the tradition, it is their right.
Prove that the vast majority of circumcisions today are performed solely for religious reasons.

Fortunately, I don't need to as I clearly stated that even though people may not choose to follow the edicts of their faith, they have a right to continue the traditions established by that faith. Kinda like how the world revels in christmas even though they may think jesus is a big ol' piece of fiction.

quote:
quote:
As far as trying to make circumcision a medical issue...if you can provide any statistics on the supposed "problems" that you listed, I'd love to see them.
Statistics are, in this case, superfluous (though I'm sure I could find some). The simple fact is that while circumcised babies are subjected to a medical procedure with small but real risk of infection and anesthesia complications; uncircumcised babies are not. Ergo, circumcision is infinitely riskier compared to non-circumcision's risk of, well, zero.

Do the risks outweigh the benefits? Although I have searched and searched, and asked and asked, I have not seen any proof that the medical risks outweigh the benefits. Hence my assertion that it's a wash.

quote:
quote:
To sum up...circumcision is simply not a medical issue.
It is a medical procedure. As such, it is subject to the criteria for medical procedures, which state clearly that elective medical procedures are not to be undertaken on a non-consenting patient.

Vaccinations are a medical procedure, too. Should we wait to vaccinate? Now, I don't like making that comparison because I do not believe that circumcision should be viewed as some type of preventative measure...but it does qualify the point that non-consent isn't a valid issue in this case.

quote:
quote:
There is no compelling evidence to deny people the right to follow their religious or cultural practices in this instance, as there is no proof that the procedure causes undo harm or that the risks outweigh the benefits.
This proof has been given multiple times and ignored. Additionally, religion and tradition end where undue harm begins - and circumcision is weel beyond that line.

This proof has yet to be given. The only "proof" supplied has been to the effect of 'you just shouldn't alter the human body' or 'I think it's icky so you shouldn't do it'.

That word you've used, "undue", that's the sticking point. You find it undue, others do not.

--------------------
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 1514 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Missy_pooh1997
Cauliflower Ears


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Missy_pooh1997   E-mail Missy_pooh1997   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Bug you basically already said it better than I could have.
Milhouse, here are a few cites out of many you may find interesting.

botched circumcision

moms against circumcision

his story

--------------------
"People do it everyday, they talk to themselves...they see themselves as they'd like to be,they dont have the courage you have, to just run with it".

Posts: 150 | From: St. Louis area | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
trollface
The Bills of St. Mary's


Icon 1 posted      Profile for trollface   Author's Homepage   E-mail trollface   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Why would they be self-conscious about it?

--------------------
seriously , everyone on here , just trys to give someone crap about something they do !! , its shitting me to tears.

Posts: 16061 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Methuselah
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Methuselah     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by missy_poo1997:
Bug you basically already said it better than I could have.
Milhouse, here are a few cites out of many you may find interesting.

botched circumcision

moms against circumcision

his story

This has all been covered and covered again in this thread. You can find several responses to those types of cites there.

--------------------
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 1514 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Lainie
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Lainie   E-mail Lainie   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Missie -- Are you aware that with UBB code, you can use italics rather than -dashes- to emphasize words?

I find the dashes difficult to read.

--------------------
How homophobic do you have to be to have penguin gaydar? - Lewis Black

Posts: 8322 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Darth Credence
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Darth Credence     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
If anyone wants to see an interesting discussion on circumcision, try out Penn and Teller:Bullshit, season 3. They did an episode on circumcision, and to my surprise, it can be reversed. They showed a man who had been circumsized, and by attaching weight to the remaining bit of skin he was able to fully regrow his foreskin. They also spoke with a Rabbi, who explained that circumcision is not necessary for Jewish males. I don't remember all the details, but if you can find a copy, it's worth it.
The other interesting point that they bring up is that there is a lot of protest about the practice of female circumcision, with the US citing it as a human rights abuse. I'm not sure why female circumcision would be considered such when we don't consider male circumcision such an abuse.

--------------------
Give yourself to the Dark Side. It is the only way you can save your friends.

Posts: 262 | From: Salt Lake City, UT | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Methuselah
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Methuselah     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Darth Credence:
If anyone wants to see an interesting discussion on circumcision, try out Penn and Teller:Bullshit, season 3. They did an episode on circumcision, and to my surprise, it can be reversed. They showed a man who had been circumsized, and by attaching weight to the remaining bit of skin he was able to fully regrow his foreskin. They also spoke with a Rabbi, who explained that circumcision is not necessary for Jewish males. I don't remember all the details, but if you can find a copy, it's worth it.
The other interesting point that they bring up is that there is a lot of protest about the practice of female circumcision, with the US citing it as a human rights abuse. I'm not sure why female circumcision would be considered such when we don't consider male circumcision such an abuse.

Because the clitoris and penis are very different parts of human anatomy. Female circumcision very often involves removing the clitoris. That would be akin to removing the glans of the penis, which is not what happens in circumcision.

Apples and oranges.

--------------------
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 1514 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Sylvanz
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Sylvanz   E-mail Sylvanz   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Four Kitties:
Originally posted by Michael Cole:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Sylvanz:
...and that the baby would "forget." He even told me he'd had one and he didn't remember it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not quite sure what the smilies are in response to....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the smileys are in reference to Sylvanz's doctor sharing with her that he's circumcized. This is not something that usually discussed in a female-patient-male-doctor relationship context.

Thanks 4K that is, indeed, what the smileys were for. My doctor did make me blush a bit on the occasion, but we did have a sort of joking around get-right-to-the-point sort of patient doctor relationship anyway. Besides, being my OB-Gyn he knew way more about me than that little circumcision tid bit, so fair is fair. [Wink] I do have to add though that I find the, "he won't remember it," reason specious. We didn't have it done to our boys because we didn't see any evidence that made it necessary, but mostly because we didn't want anyone hurting, cutting, and changing our perfectly made, perfectly beautiful, baby boys.

P&LL, Syl

--------------------
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. — Voltaire

Posts: 1944 | From: Michigan | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Syllavus
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Syllavus     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I thought this article was interesting, it's heavily biased on the con side of the debate, but I thought it was interesting that she made basically the same points that nearly everyone here who is against circumcision have made all in one article.

http://www.drcat.org/articles_interviews/html/firstcut.html

ETA: One of the things that scares me the most about circumcision is things like this... http://www.canadiancrc.com/articles/The_Province_totally_unexpected_death_29AUG02.htm

Even though I know how rare it is, the risk is there nontheless and it scares the crap out of me. I wouldn't put my child through any surgical procedure without their being some medical necessity, just because so much can go wrong. Heck I'd be worried if they had to get stitches, or their tonsils removed. If it's not something that MUST be done in order for them to be healthy, I wouldn't have it done.

--------------------
"That would be really dangerous, you know. Indiscriminately extricating someone from the petrified corpse of a supernatural creature." - My Husband

Posts: 4308 | From: Massachusetts | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Unknown Soldier
I Saw Three Shipments


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Unknown Soldier   Author's Homepage   E-mail Unknown Soldier   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I find it interesting that no one commenting in this thread has mentioned that they are circumcized. I live in the U.S. and am occasionally protestant as far as religion goes.

TMI! TMI! TMI!


I am circumsized. I don't remember being circumcized. I've never held any animosity toward my parents, doctors or the world because I was circumcized without my consent. I had never even thought of it until I heard it argued one day that it's "cruel." In fact, my father is not circumcized and he had no problem with getting his children circumcized (3 boys).

I have seen an "intact" penis and found it to be not as attractive and glad I am circumcized, but I also recognize that as being because it's different than what I've known all my life. I've never actually met a woman in person that prefers an uncircumcized penis to a curcumcized one, but how often does that topic actually come up? (no pun intended)

I've never heard of a legal case where the defendant used the fact that they had been circumcized against their will as a defense.

And relating to "consent", doesn't the right of consent fall to the parnets of minors in medical procedures? (abortions not withstanding, but that's a whole other thread).

Botched circumcisions... of course. With the number of them being performed someone is bound to get careless. It happens with just about every "routine" procedure at some point. Perhaps I should start a campaign against anesthetising(sp?) women during child birth? A good friend's wife was given an epidural too deeply which caused her to be completely paralized and unable to breath on her own and forcing her to have a c-section. well... if my wife wouldn't divorce me for not "allowing" her to have her "drugs" for her 3rd child...

The noone seems to have a compelling argument on either side. When my son is born in March, we will have him circumcized because I am circumcized and it's what's normal and acceptable for our family, culture, religion, comfort, warm fuzzies, whatever.

--------------------
Clickity Click!

Posts: 69 | From: Alabama | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
queen of the bah-caramels
Jingle Bell Hock


Icon 1 posted      Profile for queen of the bah-caramels   E-mail queen of the bah-caramels   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Darth
Many counties practice FGM (female genital mutilation). The pracice involves girls of around 6 yrs old having not only the clitoris removed but also both sets of labia .The wound is then stitched leaving a hole large enough only for the expulsion of menstural blood . Following marriage the husband has to the cut a hole large enough to insert his penis.

FGM generally occurs in very unsanitory conditions with no anesthetic .

--------------------
Focus On The Family- An opinion group who think more about Gay Sex than gay people do- Rick Mercer

Posts: 590 | From: Rawdon, Quebec | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Bug Muldoon
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Bug Muldoon   E-mail Bug Muldoon   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
The objection was to the assertion that circumcision would reduce sensitivity to the point that masturbation would lose all appeal. Is that the assertion your supporting here?
The motivation for earlier circumcisions can be wrong; that doesn't change the fact that it was the motivation.

quote:
Fortunately, I don't need to as I clearly stated that even though people may not choose to follow the edicts of their faith, they have a right to continue the traditions established by that faith. Kinda like how the world revels in christmas even though they may think jesus is a big ol' piece of fiction.
Harmless party != medical procedure

quote:
Vaccinations are a medical procedure, too. Should we wait to vaccinate? Now, I don't like making that comparison because I do not believe that circumcision should be viewed as some type of preventative measure...but it does qualify the point that non-consent isn't a valid issue in this case.

Vaccines have a clear, proven benefit - a lifesaving benefit - with little side-effects and virtually no risks. Not so with circumcision; the pro-side can do little better then point to vague, potential "benefits" that fall well within statistical margins.

--------------------
All along the untrodden paths of the future, I can see the footprints of an unseen hand.

Posts: 6912 | From: Flanders | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
BlueByrd
We Wish You a Merry Giftmas


Icon 1 posted      Profile for BlueByrd   Author's Homepage   E-mail BlueByrd   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Just popping in to once more underline the fact that, as Milhouse and Who Cares have stated before me, removal of the foreskin in males is in no way comparable, neither in terms of tissue damage nor in loss of sensation, to removal of the entire sodding clitoris in females.

Nor does circumcision in males tend to involve any orifices being stitched up, as far as I'm aware. The scar tissue resulting from female genital mutilation has been known to complicate childbirth to the point of death for either the mother (often through infection or haemorrhaging) or the child (in one documentary I forced myself to sit through, pressure from contractions and the scar barrier together snapped the infant's neck). A detailed if very technical overview of such risks can be found here.

Blue "literally burst into tears whilst researching the above" Byrd

--------------------
"A monster!"
"A local!"


Posts: 831 | From: The standee gallery at a Viennese opera house | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Oualawouzou
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Oualawouzou     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bug Muldoon:
Vaccines have a clear, proven benefit - a lifesaving benefit - with little side-effects and virtually no risks. Not so with circumcision; the pro-side can do little better then point to vague, potential "benefits" that fall well within statistical margins.

What of the risks of circumcision? Do they fall within statistical margins too? What about a comparison between circumcised and uncircumcised men? If both have the same (within statistical margins) troubles down there, isn't the medical argument a non-issue for both sides?

--------------------
Le champignon arrive.

Posts: 4372 | From: Quebec | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Bug Muldoon
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Bug Muldoon   E-mail Bug Muldoon   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
If both have the same (within statistical margins) troubles down there, isn't the medical argument a non-issue for both sides?
Non-circumcision still has the benefit that there's no anaesthectics and post-op enfection involved.

quote:
When my son is born in March, we will have him circumcized because I am circumcized and it's what's normal and acceptable for our family, culture, religion, comfort, warm fuzzies, whatever.
This would be the same reasoning used to make women wear burkas - it's tradition, it's what our culture does, it's "warm and fuzzy".

Think about that.

--------------------
All along the untrodden paths of the future, I can see the footprints of an unseen hand.

Posts: 6912 | From: Flanders | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
timbobmc
Jingle Bell Hock


Icon 106 posted      Profile for timbobmc   E-mail timbobmc   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bored and Dangerous:
quote:
while babies are mutilated while fully conscious and in agony (and usually being held down by some strapping-device while they struggle).
Cite, please.

I've not heard of any children being physically restrained with straps while being circumcised and not have some form of anesthesia, usually local. Don't let your attitude towards circumcision lead you into a strawman.

ETA: After doing some research, yes, there are restraints, but no one is strapped down by any means. Mainly the baby's feet are put out of the way to do the procedure. And not everyone does it, either. Also, modern medical practice always advocates the use of anesthesia during infant circumcision.

quote:
Personally, I don't think circumcision should be a medical decision at all. It's solely a cultural/religious decision.
I agree. While there may or may not be medical benefits, those who choose to do it should be left alone about it and those who don't do it should also be left alone, a la pro-choice and abortion. No one should be demonized because they do it or don't do it, for whatever reason.

Circumcision procedure

--------------------
Ich bin der Welt abhanden gekommen.

Posts: 536 | From: Gonzales, Louisiana | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Methuselah
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Methuselah     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oualawouzou:
quote:
Originally posted by Bug Muldoon:
Vaccines have a clear, proven benefit - a lifesaving benefit - with little side-effects and virtually no risks. Not so with circumcision; the pro-side can do little better then point to vague, potential "benefits" that fall well within statistical margins.

What of the risks of circumcision? Do they fall within statistical margins too? What about a comparison between circumcised and uncircumcised men? If both have the same (within statistical margins) troubles down there, isn't the medical argument a non-issue for both sides?
That is exactly why I refer to the issue medically as "a wash". You are no better off or worse off from a medical standpoint either way...many, many people will never be convinced of this (and I don't think less of them for it, by any means).

But until someone proves that circumcision causes harm to a greater degree than the chance of similar harm faced by those with a foreskin, I say choose based on your own beliefs.

--------------------
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 1514 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Bug Muldoon
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Bug Muldoon   E-mail Bug Muldoon   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
But until someone proves that circumcision causes harm to a greater degree than the chance of similar harm faced by those with a foreskin, I say choose based on your own beliefs.
You are still ignoring the inherent risk of performing a medical procedure - a risk that's even greater on a newborn.

You are still denying the child the right to an intact body.

You are still denying the child the right to choose for circumcision himself, as an adult.

You are still perpetuating the idea that tradition is a valid motivation for elective medical procedures.

You are still refusing to rationally discuss the issue.

You have failed, again, to provide any objective reason to perform this procedure, while failing, again, to counter the proven risks.

In short, you've plugged your fingers in your ears and believe that shouting "TRADITION ! NO RISK !" is a valid defense.

Unknown Soldier :

Please don't do it. Don't circumcise your son, leave the choice to him. Will he be picked on ? Perhaps. But if it isn't for his penis, it will be for something else, and as a parent it's up to you to affirm his belief that he is normal.

Break the cycle.

--------------------
All along the untrodden paths of the future, I can see the footprints of an unseen hand.

Posts: 6912 | From: Flanders | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Oualawouzou
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Oualawouzou     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bug Muldoon:
Non-circumcision still has the benefit that there's no anaesthectics and post-op enfection involved.

You are *still* not responding to the question.

Someone earlier in the thread mentionned a few medical problems more common in circumcised men than in uncircumcised men. What I'm asking for is, at the end of the day, from birth to death, including the circumcision itself, do circumcised individuals face more or less problems than uncircumcised individuals? Including complications during circumcision. Including the inherent risks of the operation.

If [risks inherent to the operation + troubles that occur later in circumcised men] = [troubles that occur in uncircumcised men], then the medical argument is moot. The fact that the operation itself carries risks matters not because the end result is that the risks are similar.

Take the argument to any other ground: ethical, religious, etc. But if the sum of medical problems for circumcised and uncircumcised individuals is the same, then the argument that one carries more health risks than the other is dishonest.

--------------------
Le champignon arrive.

Posts: 4372 | From: Quebec | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Bug Muldoon
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Bug Muldoon   E-mail Bug Muldoon   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Someone earlier in the thread mentionned a few medical problems more common in circumcised men than in uncircumcised men.
* Urinary tract infection. There is roughly a 1% risk of this developing in a uncircumcised child, less when breastfed. It can be treated by antibiotics; circumcision may reduce the risk of getting this infection, but the evidence is inconclusive.

* Penile cancer. Extremely rare and almost exclusively found in elderly men. 37% of those with this type of cancer are circumcised, so circumcision offers *at best* a slightly reduced chance of getting it.

* Increased risk of cervical cancer for the partner : disproven

* Increased chance of spreading an STD : disproven


While up to 20% of those who *are* circumcised suffer from one or more of the following :

# Meatal stenosis (narrowing of the urethral opening due to infection and subsequent scarring, that occurs almost exclusively in circumcised boys)
# extensive scarring of the penile shaft
# skin tags and skin bridges
# bleeding of the circumcision scar
# curvature of the penis
# tight, painful erections
# psychological and psychosexual problems

In addition to the standard complications of the procedure itself :

# Excessive bleeding
# Injury to the glans
# Infection (raw wound is exposed to feces and urine in diaper)
# Complications from anaesthesia, if used
# Surgical error, including removal of too much skin

From here, though I've seen all of these arguments elsewhere.

--------------------
All along the untrodden paths of the future, I can see the footprints of an unseen hand.

Posts: 6912 | From: Flanders | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Meerkat
I'm Dreaming of a White Sale


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Meerkat   E-mail Meerkat   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Milhouse Van Houten:
quote:
Originally posted by Oualawouzou:
quote:
Originally posted by Bug Muldoon:
Vaccines have a clear, proven benefit - a lifesaving benefit - with little side-effects and virtually no risks. Not so with circumcision; the pro-side can do little better then point to vague, potential "benefits" that fall well within statistical margins.

What of the risks of circumcision? Do they fall within statistical margins too? What about a comparison between circumcised and uncircumcised men? If both have the same (within statistical margins) troubles down there, isn't the medical argument a non-issue for both sides?
That is exactly why I refer to the issue medically as "a wash". You are no better off or worse off from a medical standpoint either way...many, many people will never be convinced of this (and I don't think less of them for it, by any means).

But until someone proves that circumcision causes harm to a greater degree than the chance of similar harm faced by those with a foreskin, I say choose based on your own beliefs.

Haven't read the whole thread...so this might be a repeat response. I'm a nurse, and have personally strapped infants into a CircumStraint board for the procedure. I've never seen a circ done with anesthesia other than a little cream on the area (YEA RIGHT like that helps) and some sugar water for the baby to suck on. (I'll remember that when I have a baby---'no, forget the epidural, just give me a little sugar wayer, and that's make it a cinch!')
It's horrible in my opinion, and I have made it known that I will no longer participate in circumcisions on infants. Ever.

--------------------
My reality check bounced.

Posts: 8 | From: Pensacola, Florida | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ciara...
Markdown, the Herald Angels Sing


Icon 210 posted      Profile for Ciara...   Author's Homepage     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bored and Dangerous, with tinsel:
quote:
Originally posted by Ciara...:
quote:
Originally posted by Bored and Dangerous, with tinsel:
quote:
I seem to remember a famous case where a baby boy had a horribly botched circumsision, and the damage was so severe they were forced to reassign his gender as a girl.
Cite?
David Reimer, 38, Subject of the John/Joan Case, Dies
If you research it a little more, the reason he was mutilated was because the doctors were experimenting with burning the foreskin off with a cautery machine instead of cutting it. This isn't done at all, and shouldn't have been done in the first place, and is a poor example if you want to say that routine circumcision harms children.
Not sure which one of us that was directed towards. I am familiar with the case, I just provided a link to it.

quote:
Originally posted by Unknown Soldier:
Perhaps I should start a campaign against anesthetising(sp?) women during child birth?

Go ahead. Though I fail to see what it has to do with the discussion at hand.

quote:
Originally posted by Bug Muldoon:
You are still denying the child the right to choose for circumcision himself, as an adult.

This is what it all comes down to for me. You want to get circumcised? Knock yourself out. You want your son to get circumcised? What does he want? A baby cannot give you an answer.

[Edited because I can't spell.]

--------------------
-Oh, we'd all like to lick the great Superman, Jimmy.

Posts: 2298 | From: Eastern Scandinavia (Sverige) | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Bug Muldoon
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Bug Muldoon   E-mail Bug Muldoon   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
This is what it all comes down to for me. You want to get circumsised? Knock yourself out. You want your son to get circumsized? What does he want? A baby cannot give you an answer.
€5 says someone's going to barge in with "...but they don't choose to be vaccinated either !"

--------------------
All along the untrodden paths of the future, I can see the footprints of an unseen hand.

Posts: 6912 | From: Flanders | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
timbobmc
Jingle Bell Hock


Icon 106 posted      Profile for timbobmc   E-mail timbobmc   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
When my best friend's son was born, she and her husband were specifically advised not to have him circumcised. Apparently, the opening to his urethra was off-centered, and the doctor said that if he even possibly would want to have plastic surgery in the future to correct it, the extra tissue from the foreskin would be necessary.

I guess my friend and her husband figured that as a teen he might be more embarassed by an off-centerd urethra than by being uncircumcised.

The boy has had no urinary tract infections so far, and since he's in 1st grade now, I doubt they're going to start showing up any time soon.

--------------------
Ich bin der Welt abhanden gekommen.

Posts: 536 | From: Gonzales, Louisiana | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ciara...
Markdown, the Herald Angels Sing


Icon 210 posted      Profile for Ciara...   Author's Homepage     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Doh!  - I just realised that I spelt circumcised wrong. Twice. In two different ways. Oh dear.

Re: Vaccination vs. circumcision. Wonder what's riskier: not being vaccinated or not being circumcised.

--------------------
-Oh, we'd all like to lick the great Superman, Jimmy.

Posts: 2298 | From: Eastern Scandinavia (Sverige) | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Bug Muldoon
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Bug Muldoon   E-mail Bug Muldoon   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Re: Vaccination vs. circumcision. Wonder what's riskier: not being vaccinated or not being circumcised.
smallpox vs UTI. I know what I'd pick [lol]

--------------------
All along the untrodden paths of the future, I can see the footprints of an unseen hand.

Posts: 6912 | From: Flanders | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Unknown Soldier
I Saw Three Shipments


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Unknown Soldier   Author's Homepage   E-mail Unknown Soldier   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ciara...:
quote:
Originally posted by Unknown Soldier:
Perhaps I should start a campaign against anesthetising(sp?) women during child birth?

Go ahead. Though I fail to see what it has to do with the discussion at hand.
I was speaking to those who argue the possible risks of the procedure ("botched" specifically) warrant its not being performed as a "routine" procedure. Using anesthetics during childbirth has its risks also, as depicted in my anecdote. The sarcasm was apparently lost... and not very heart-felt to begin with, as my opinion on this subject is rather bland.

--------------------
Clickity Click!

Posts: 69 | From: Alabama | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Methuselah
Happy Holly Days


Icon 05 posted      Profile for Methuselah     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bug Muldoon:
You are still ignoring the inherent risk of performing a medical procedure - a risk that's even greater on a newborn.

The medical community almost unanimously agrees that the risks associated with circumcision are greater in adults than newborns.


quote:
You are still perpetuating the idea that tradition is a valid motivation for elective medical procedures.

Yep.

quote:
You are still refusing to rationally discuss the issue.

Nope.

quote:
You have failed, again, to provide any objective reason to perform this procedure, while failing, again, to counter the proven risks.

I haven't failed to provide reason. You have, yet again, failed to recognize any opinion besides your own as being valid.

quote:
In short, you've plugged your fingers in your ears and believe that shouting "TRADITION ! NO RISK !" is a valid defense.

"Hey there kettle...this is the pot...you're black!"

--------------------
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 1514 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Methuselah
Happy Holly Days


Icon 206 posted      Profile for Methuselah     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bug Muldoon:
* Urinary tract infection. There is roughly a 1% risk of this developing in a uncircumcised child, less when breastfed. It can be treated by antibiotics; circumcision may reduce the risk of getting this infection, but the evidence is inconclusive.

* Penile cancer. Extremely rare and almost exclusively found in elderly men. 37% of those with this type of cancer are circumcised, so circumcision offers *at best* a slightly reduced chance of getting it.

* Increased risk of cervical cancer for the partner : disproven

* Increased chance of spreading an STD : disproven

From MedicineNet:
quote:
Studies in US Army hospitals involving more than 200,000 infant boys confirmed greater than a tenfold increase in urinary tract infections in uncircumcised male infants compared to those who had been circumcised. Circumcision prevents the growth of bacteria under the foreskin and this, in turn, protects male infants against urinary tract infection. The high incidence of urinary tract infections in uncircumcised boys has also been found to be accompanied by an increased incidence of other significant infections such as bacteremia (bacterial infection of the bloodstream) and meningitis (infection of the covering of the brain). The protective effect of circumcision may thus extend to a number of infectious diseases.
quote:
There is a higher risk of gonorrhea and inflammation of the urethra (the tube that carries the urine from the bladder outside) in uncircumcised men. It has also been reported that other sexually transmitted diseases (such as chancroid, syphilis, human papillomavirus, and herpes simplex virus type 2 infection) are more frequent in uncircumcised men. There is a strong connection between sexually transmitted diseases and cancer of the cervix. Human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 are strongly associated with cancer of the cervix. Herpes simplex virus type 2 has also been associated with cervical cancer. Circumcision protects the mate from cancer of the cervix by removing the foreskin which harbors sexually transmitted viruses that promote this common form of female cancer.
quote:
The predicted lifetime risk of cancer of the penis in an uncircumcised man is 1 in 600 in the US. Cancer of the penis carries a mortality rate as high as 25%. This cancer occurs almost exclusively in uncircumcised men. In five major research studies, no man who had been circumcised as a newborn developed cancer of the penis.
quote:
While up to 20% of those who *are* circumcised suffer from one or more of the following :

Even the activist group NOHARMM states the rate of complications of neonatal circumcision to be no greater than 2%-10%. And then there's this from a study conducted by doctors at the University of Washington:
quote:
This report, the broadest of its kind, examined all hospital records in the state of Washington for a study period of more than nine years. The study finds there was a complication in one out of every 476 circumcisions.
Now, I'm no mathematician...but I'm fairly certain that doesn't equal 20%.

quote:
# Meatal stenosis (narrowing of the urethral opening due to infection and subsequent scarring, that occurs almost exclusively in circumcised boys)

From MedicineNet:
quote:
Meatitis is more common in boys who have been circumcised. This stands to reason since, in circumcised boys the urethral meatus is more exposed and likely to be chaffed than in boys that were not circumcised. There is no evidence that meatitis leads to narrowing (stenosis) of the urethral meatus or to other serious problems.
quote:
# extensive scarring of the penile shaft

Hmmm, if total complications happen only 1 out of every 476 procedures...I think we can deduce that extensive scarring is not the complication each of those times, which means that this would be a pretty rare occurance.

quote:
# skin tags and skin bridges
Same as above, and these can be repaired with a follow-up procedure

quote:
# bleeding of the circumcision scar
Sounds serious...better get a band-aid.

quote:
# curvature of the penis
This isn't a risk associated with circumcision. Curvature of the penis occurs as frequently in circumcised men as in uncircumcised men.

quote:
# tight, painful erections

Much less common than similar problems with uncircumcised men (phimosis, paraphimosis)

quote:
# psychological and psychosexual problems

Proven where? Oh, you mean those anecdotal stories where men decide to direct their anger at their parents decision to circumcise them? Yes folks, anecdotes=data.

quote:
In addition to the standard complications of the procedure itself :

# Excessive bleeding
# Injury to the glans
# Infection (raw wound is exposed to feces and urine in diaper)
# Complications from anaesthesia, if used
# Surgical error, including removal of too much skin

From here, though I've seen all of these arguments elsewhere.

Ah yes, CIRP, that beautiful unbiased organization supported by Association for Genital Integrity, Musicians United to Stop Involuntary Circumcision, and Intact. [Roll Eyes]

As pointed out earlier, the rate of complications is low. Now I am not trying to convince ANYONE to get a circumcision or to get their child circumcised. As I have repeatedly stated, I am making it known that there is no medical or scientific reason to stop someone from requesting this procedure.

From the University of Washington study:
quote:
Almost all of the problems arising from either circumcision or its lack -- urinary tract infections, excessive bleeding and penile wounds -- are easily treated.
quote:
The UW study is a "trade-off analysis." The trade-off analysis determined that for every case of a boy who has a complication from circumcision, six boys can be expected to have avoided urinary tract infections. For every two cases of circumcision complications, one case of penile cancer is prevented.
quote:
"We're talking about trade-offs for very rare risks and very rare benefits," Christakis says. "Now, I can tell parents that one in 500 circumcised children may suffer a complication, and one in 100 children may derive a benefit. But people will weigh that differently. However, the vast majority of children will gain no medical benefit nor suffer any complication as a result of circumcision."
Summing up, once again, no compelling reason for it, no compelling reason against it...therefore if it is a religious or cultural tradition that you believe in, then there is no reason to stop that tradition.

--------------------
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 1514 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post new topic  New Poll  Post a reply Close topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Urban Legends Reference Pages

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2