Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter
Have you not read the links from the American Academy of Pediatrics and Centers for Disease Control that say the medical benefits of circumcision outweigh any risks?
There is a real basis, whether or not you choose to acknowledge it.
|
In point of fact, the CDC is basing their opinion of a handful of studies done in Africa, the reliability of which is in question.
Those studies purport to show that a man is somewhat more likely to contract HIV from an infected woman.
Simple solution - avoid sex with multiple partners, strangers, prostitutes. Use a condom. Much easier, less invasive, and safer than having a circumcision - which doesn't protect you from getting HIV. Circumcised men STILL need to do all of the above, or wear a condom if they can't manage to control themselves enough to keep it in their pants.
Another "conclusion" is that an uncircumcised man may be at a slightly greater risk for contracting HPV, which may lead to that tiny tiny chance of getting penile cancer. Again, that has already been accounted for in the existing statistics - the risk of penile cancer due to HPV or other virii is vanishingly small. And - AGAIN - Keeping it in your pants or at least wearing a condom when you can't manage that is the recommended way to protect one's self, EVEN IF A MAN IS CIRCUMCISED.
ALSO - MEN CAN AND SHOULD BE VACCINATED FOR HPV. Again, easier, cheaper, safer than circumcision, and even circumcised men should have this done anyway.
SO - in all cases above - circumcision does not provide any real protection that isn't superseded by better methods such as KEEPING IT IN YOUR PANTS or at least wearing a condom if you can't manage that.
Quote:
|
And you know what he is doing sexually? You know girls reactions to his penis?
|
While I don't know about the poster to whom you were ranting - but in my case, yes, I DO know how girls react to his penis - because I asked. Specifically, not long ago, when we were on the subject of circumcision for other reasons. I asked if he had had any problems due to the fact that he had not been circumcised - and he laughed. "Of course not" - according to him - because most of his cohort are also not circumcised, and the girls whom he has dated were used to the appearance of both circumcised and uncircumcised penises in their dating. But apparently mostly uncircumcised, among college graduates.
The statistics show that better educated parents are less likely to have their sons circumcised, for 2 reasons - one is that they are more likely to be educated as to the risks and lack of benefits (and are able to research the facts and fallacies for themselves), but the other is that they are less likely to allow a medical professional of any sort to take an authoritative stance with them. "Because the doctor recommends" doesn't go over big with this group, not without evidence and an explanation. Less well-educated parents can be more easily manipulated and brow-beaten into doing something just because the doctor says.
Hence - at present, only 58% of young men in their late 20's/early 30's and younger are circumcised, as opposed to nearly 98% in the 50's. That number is dropping.
Quote:
|
There are no compelling reasons for female circumcision, there are valid medical reasons for male circumcision. I could argue it is barbaric to expose your son to future diseases and infections that can be greatly reduced by a simple procedure.
|
You're only half right - there is no compelling reason for female circumcision, and there is no compelling reason for male circumcision either.
There is no disease that a man will be exposed to UNLESS he insists on having frequent unsafe sex with questionable partners, without protection.
All it takes is a condom, a vaccination for HPV that everyone, male and female, ought to have, and - HEAVEN FORFEND! A little self-control.
Quote:
|
It is an incredible cop out and an abdication of parental responsibility. You are supposed to make decisions for your child for their welfare and benefit, especially if they are not competent to at the time to make a decision.
|
Which is EXACTLY why no parent should ever consent to a medically unnecessary "prophylactic" circumcision, any more than they should consent to a prophylactic appendectomy.
Quote:
|
When your son is 4 and wants to go out in the cold and play without a coat on are you going to acquiesce to his wishes? When he doesn't want to go see the dentist, will it be okay because it is his body?
|
Strawman.
Quote:
|
Sack up and make a decision based on a careful consideration of the facts, not a whiny "it's his decision".
|
Well being female its a bit difficult for me to actually PHYSICALLY "sack up", but in the metaphoric sense, that is EXACTLY what I did when I refused, despite whiny pressure from repressed nurses with weird religious agendas, to have my son circumcised. I encourage every parent to "sack up", as it were, and refuse this useless procedure.
Quote:
|
That whole post was the equivalent of placing your hands over your ears and going "la la la, I can't hear you la la la."
|
Hmmm. Pot ... Kettle ... Black ... get my drift?
Quote:
|
You didn't address a single thing in the post you were purportedly responding to. He discussed medical studies, you discussed everything but.
|
Well that's because there are no CREDIBLE studies that show any benefits that can't be had by doing things one ought to be doing anyway, regardless of the state of a man's foreskin.
BTW - according to the American Academy of Pediatrics, while some studies purport to show some small benefits, their position is that it STILL isn't worth it to automatically circumcise all male children - because those benefits are small and (I repeat) there are better ways to get more and better benefits by doing things all men need to do EVEN if they are circumcised.
So - there is actually no real support from science OR medicine for the idea that prophylactic circumcision has any real benefits.
Quote:
|
Seriously.... you've had your sons go "golly thanks Mom for not having us circumcised." Who talks to their mother about their penis? Who talks about their penis at all?
|
Well - I think this has already been covered above - but MY son has said that - in the course of a conversation about circumcision. Its not like either of us brings up the subject at the drop of a hat - but in the course of a conversation, why SHOULDN'T a man discuss the subject of circumcision in the presence of the parent who saved him from having it done when he was young and helpless?
LOL!
Quote:
Why do people keep saying this when there clearly are benefits?
(MAJOR snippage of continued repeated ranting about things that have already been addressed multiple times by multiple posters, but which you repeatedly ignore or dismiss out of hand without thought)
|
There are NOT clear benefits.
The studies to which you continually refer don't show what you think they show, many were done in Africa under less than ideal circumstances in an environment that is completely different - for instance, female circumcision leads to a higher female-to-male HIV infection rate, which is a factor that is largely absent in the USA.
In the face of that risk factor, any additional risk factor presumed to be due to the state of a man's foreskin is minor.
And remember - circumcised or not - the recommended ways to reduce the risk of AIDS is (1) DON'T HAVE MULTIPLE SEX PARTNERS and (2) if you can't manage that, WEAR A CONDOM. Circumcision has nothing to do with it.
That's the real world. It doesn't matter whether or not a man is circumcised - every risk factor these studies purport to attribute to an intact foreskin is better taken care of by WEARING A CONDOM and NOT SLEEPING AROUND. Oh, and getting the HPV vaccine.
Its that simple.
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.
.
