U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-27-2011, 01:00 PM
 
1,248 posts, read 1,833,680 times
Reputation: 1237

Advertisements

A parent should have no right to unnecessarily mutilate or amputate a part of the child for mere aesthetic or personal reasons by the parent. This should be a CHOICE by the person who is being circumcised. Gutting out or cutting off the nerves of a child's genitalia is violating that child. Let them grow up and then consent if they wish to do this.

 
Old 03-29-2011, 09:38 PM
 
345 posts, read 401,965 times
Reputation: 236
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeavingMassachusetts View Post
I had both of my sons done and would have never considered not doing it.

I went to high school with a kid who had to have it done at 17. I'm sure that was a good time.


I was 23. Even with handfuls of percodin every few hours and a constant bag of ice the pain found it's way through. I'm not sure if this is true but I've heard they won't do them after a certain age since the shock to the system is so big. Could be a myth, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's true.
 
Old 03-30-2011, 06:33 AM
 
Location: In a house
13,258 posts, read 34,623,814 times
Reputation: 20198
I imagine that they'd continue to do these procedures, as long as there exists any men suffering from phimosis (the inability for a foreskin to retract). Check out "Matthews's Circumcision" on dailymotion - I won't link it, because it includes actual photographs of the man's penis in various states, pre-surgery, post-surgery (day 1, 2, 3-10, a month post-surgery), and a year after surgery. He had his done at age 23 because he suffered from phimosis, and balanitis (inflammation of the head and foreskin, including unpleasant discharges) resulting from the phimosis and inability to retract the foreskin to clean underneath it.

One would hope that any man experiencing what this man experienced, at ANY age, would have no trouble finding a qualified physician to perform the circumcision.

Other than that, I think it's a matter of personal preference. It's a more traumatic procedure as an adult, because at birth, the anatomy is a bit different. The sac hasn't dropped yet, there's nothing for the penis to bounce against post-surgery, for one example; babies are unaware of visual sexual stimulation cues, for another, and therefore aren't subject to visually-stimulated erections - which can be painful post-surgery as well, for another example.

Growing up Jewish, I haven't met one single man, in my entire life, who was circumcised within his first couple of months of life, and remembered any trauma of being circumcised, or noticed any lack of sexual ability as an adult. I -do- hear them complain that wearing a condom is less pleasurable than not wearing one. But I hear that from men whose foreskins are intact as well.
 
Old 03-30-2011, 07:20 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn New York
15,231 posts, read 23,764,219 times
Reputation: 19861
Everybody has a point, in their own way.....

..... but God created man with foreskin. He did not put foreskin there for "man" to remove it, that makes no sense what so ever. Circumcision is a "man made" idea. "man" has deceided to remove it for whatever reason ....................

Who are we to tell God it doesn't belong there........


It's like telling God he made a mistake with the human body, and it shouldn't be there
 
Old 03-30-2011, 07:28 AM
 
419 posts, read 734,465 times
Reputation: 369
For anyone who's worried that their son will run into problems later on if he's not circumcised as a baby, keep in mind that uncommon potential problems like balanitis or phimosis can be usually treated with antibiotics and steroid creams. With phimosis, preputioplasy is a less severe surgical procedure option than circumcision. And with balanitis, the most common cause is poor hygiene, so that's easily preventable in most cases.
 
Old 03-30-2011, 07:37 AM
 
419 posts, read 734,465 times
Reputation: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonChick View Post
... I haven't met one single man, in my entire life, who was circumcised within his first couple of months of life, and remembered any trauma of being circumcised, or noticed any lack of sexual ability as an adult. ...
Regarding the level of sexual pleasure in circumcised men, it's hard to notice what's never been. Now you've got me wondering if there's been any studies on this.
 
Old 03-30-2011, 08:05 AM
 
Location: In a house
13,258 posts, read 34,623,814 times
Reputation: 20198
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaida View Post
For anyone who's worried that their son will run into problems later on if he's not circumcised as a baby, keep in mind that uncommon potential problems like balanitis or phimosis can be usually treated with antibiotics and steroid creams. With phimosis, preputioplasy is a less severe surgical procedure option than circumcision. And with balanitis, the most common cause is poor hygiene, so that's easily preventable in most cases.
I wasn't talking about balanitis, exclusively. I thought i was pretty clear on that. I was talking about balanitis *as a result of* phimosis. If you have phimosis, AND ALSO DEVELOP balanitis, then it isn't a matter of poor hygiene. You cannot clean past a barrier. If the foreskin DOES NOT RETRACT then you cannot pull it back to clean behind it. That is WHY it's a problem.
 
Old 03-30-2011, 08:09 AM
 
419 posts, read 734,465 times
Reputation: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonChick View Post
I wasn't talking about balanitis, exclusively. I thought i was pretty clear on that. I was talking about balanitis *as a result of* phimosis. If you have phimosis, AND ALSO DEVELOP balanitis, then it isn't a matter of poor hygiene. You cannot clean past a barrier. If the foreskin DOES NOT RETRACT then you cannot pull it back to clean behind it. That is WHY it's a problem.
I never said that phimosis is caused by poor hygiene. I said that about balanitis only. And I was talking about the two as separate conditions (to keep it simple).
 
Old 03-30-2011, 08:13 AM
 
1,302 posts, read 1,529,678 times
Reputation: 1916
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightcrawler View Post
Everybody has a point, in their own way.....

..... but God created man with foreskin. He did not put foreskin there for "man" to remove it, that makes no sense what so ever. Circumcision is a "man made" idea. "man" has deceided to remove it for whatever reason ....................

Who are we to tell God it doesn't belong there........


It's like telling God he made a mistake with the human body, and it shouldn't be there
Not everybody believes in God?
 
Old 03-30-2011, 08:16 AM
 
Location: In a house
13,258 posts, read 34,623,814 times
Reputation: 20198
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightcrawler View Post
Everybody has a point, in their own way.....

..... but God created man with foreskin. He did not put foreskin there for "man" to remove it, that makes no sense what so ever. Circumcision is a "man made" idea. "man" has deceided to remove it for whatever reason ....................

Who are we to tell God it doesn't belong there........


It's like telling God he made a mistake with the human body, and it shouldn't be there
From the King James Bible, standard revision, revised 1952 - Genesis 17:11

Quote:
You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. (12) He that is eight days old among you shall be circumcised; every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house, or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring...(snip to 14)... any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.
That's not something I read online, I got it from my copy of the King Jame's Bible. I have a Torah as well, but unfortunately I don't read Hebrew and therefore can't translate it.

The summary is: if you are Jewish, born, or a slave to a Jewish household (since slavery was common then, and allowed) then God commands that you be circumcised. No one is questioning God. That is God's command. Circumcised of the flesh. If you don't get cut at the foreskin then you get cut from your people. Those are your choices. If you're not cut, you're not Jewish, and you have no covenant with God.

If you're not Jewish, then this rule doesn't apply. But I'm answering your question, which is: "Who are we to tell God it doesn't belong there?" My answer is, God is the one telling people it doesn't belong there IF you are Jewish. God has no opinion of it either way, otherwise. Who are we to question God's decision that it doesn't?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top