This is pure rage fuel.
Dear Elijah,
So now you have it behind you, and maybe it is only your business. But your mother said that maybe I should write it down, how it was with your circumcision, so that one day, that is, now, when you can read, you can read how it was back then. And now in the newspaper too, because it affects some - and many don't know anything about circumcision.
First of all: It was already clear before you were born that you would be circumcised. Your mother is Jewish - and before we got married, she and I made a deal that you might find a bit banal, but which had consequences for you: Our children, if we should have any, would have my surname and their religion. And that meant for you: circumcision!
Now you have done it very cleverly, because you were born five weeks early - and thus, as a premature baby, withdrew from circumcision. Because according to religious laws, this should actually take place on the eighth day after the birth. But you don't circumcise a premature baby. That would be too dangerous. And in the hospital where the circumcision was supposed to take place, we were told to wait until you were one year old. Then your little body, more precisely: your liver in particular, can cope with the general anesthesia that is necessary for a circumcision by an experienced surgeon, which we naturally wanted out of concern for you.
So we took it easy. But as soon as you were one year old, we always set circumcision appointments, which you then, slightly perfidious, let burst again and again: Sometimes you had a laceration on your forehead, which is why the anesthetist refused an operation. Sometimes you were in such a bad mood because of getting used to the daycare that we didn't want to give you an operation. But you got a cold several times shortly before the crucial week - and even then the surgeons did not want to accept the risk of the operation.
Your parents made a new attempt in the late summer of 2007 - you were just two and a half years old. A holiday week near the Baltic Sea should cure your constant cold, that's what we thought. Then another ten days in Berlin so that the wound on your penis can heal. In fact, we got an appointment for the circumcision at the Jewish Hospital in Berlin. You can't believe how slowly the four days passed between the appointment of the appointment and the actual operation: We treated you like a raw egg, packed you in several sweaters and socks so that you wouldn't catch a cold. Then the time had come, on a Tuesday you came under the knife.
You can imagine that we had a pretty bad conscience to expect you to have such an operation - and then with general anesthesia, because at this age there is no other way to do it. It is impossible to imagine if something had happened to you during the circumcision itself or through the anesthesia. Is it allowed to expose a child to such dangers without a medical reason forcing it? Can religion justify this? I slept very poorly the night before the operation. That I let the operation happen may seem brutal to you today. I could understand
On the morning of the operation, I took your sister to daycare. She found it all very exciting and told Hinz and Kunz about it. Your mother drove you to the hospital - the operation went smoothly. Thank God! Religion was also served, the surgeon gave the required blessing. Your mother said that due to the very gentle anesthesia you woke up immediately after the operation and immediately started screaming like a stick. You shouldn't scream as this led to new bleeding on your now circumcised penis.
When I visited your mother with your sister the afternoon after the operation, your mother was completely exhausted. She had cried too, the surgeon had tried to comfort her. Desperately she clung to the encouragement of a nurse who said that one day you would thank your mother for the circumcision. Well, I hope so!
The first days after the circumcision were a horror - especially for you, but also for us. At first you didn't want to put on diapers and instead peed on everything: sheets and carpets in particular. After all, the pee worked perfectly. Every now and then there was blood in the diaper, we called the hospital several times about it, but they said it was okay.
Most of the time you walked around the apartment half-naked. When we were at dinner on the first day, we put a serviette on your penis so that the wound would not be soiled: You proudly lifted the serviette when your neighbor friends came over to check on you. What you said to them, something with "Bänis", was hard to understand - just as we rarely understand exactly what you are actually saying. Your language skills have not yet developed very much (maybe this was an advantage here).
But the biggest annoyance was with the entire bandage around your penis - it didn't want to and didn't want to come off! We bathed you, as prescribed by the doctor, at least three times a day so that the bandage would slowly come off. But it held up bombproof, and we shouldn't pull it off under any circumstances. You complained about the association that it was so tight, so we translated your complaint.
On Sunday, five days after the operation, I finally went back to the surgeon with you, who reassured me: The wound looks good, no inflammation. If the bandage isn't off in two days, we should come back to the hospital. But he'll leave, don't worry. With the hundreds of circumcisions he made, it was only necessary to cut the bandage with scissors twice, said the doctor. Then he shook my hand, very warmly and for a long time. Cut it off with scissors!
But thank God you haven't understood all of this at all. You were pretty brave in the clinic for that. And as an exception, you were always allowed to sleep with mom at night while I had to spend the night in the nursery. So the whole thing also had advantages, admittedly: small ones. The huge fire wagon that you got from your mother also made up for you a little. She promised it to you immediately after the procedure, so that you would stop crying.
You kept that well and purposefully selected the most expensive one. Your mother paid the enormous bill without complaint - also a form of calming your guilty conscience. Of course, we were always very worried. I kept asking myself: What's all this shit about! And all because something like that is in a 2,500 year old book by a desert people! I respect and yet like a lot about Judaism. But wouldn't a beautiful Jewish life also be possible without circumcision?
A week after the operation, the bandage, apart from a small corner, was still not off. So I went back to the hospital with you - you cried as soon as I opened the diaper. I could have howled along, but didn't allow myself to do so. Two doctors discussed the situation, then a decision was made: the bandage must be removed. A sweet nurse took a small cup, filled it with tap water, pushed your tiny penis into it, spoke to you well, then we waited. I tried to comfort you. Because you kept crying, I read you a children's book to distract you. It did little. The nurse said we should have pulled the bandage much earlier. Then at last he broke away a little. The nurse bravely grabbed one end of the bandage and plucked it off quickly and skillfully. Finally! My son's penis was free!
After that, you went uphill. The swelling around your penis receded, the threads around the wound gradually loosened, we were able to reduce the constant bathing in the morning, afternoon and evening a little. Another mishap happened during a bath: We actually didn't want to tell our parents anything about the circumcision and the complications that resulted from it, in order not to have to share their objections and worries. Instead, they should be presented with a fait accompli, which would be better for everyone, we thought. But of course it happened, as it had to, your sister babbled on the phone in a conversation with your mother's parents: Your grandparents almost had a heart attack! But we still had to laugh.
So now you're circumcised, and, admittedly, that doesn't look bad, aesthetically speaking. Now we hear from this and that that it has also been circumcised - mostly for hygienic and medical reasons. Your mom got into a lengthy email discussion on the subject with a friend who thought what we did to you was pretty stupid.
Two women told me that it was better in bed with circumcised men. A friend of mine who is circumcised told me what his doctor had said to him before the circumcision: "Before the operation: pistol - after the operation: cannon!" I don't know if that's true, but I wish it for you. So that not only is religion satisfied, but you also benefit from it. So no offense!
All the best!
Your father.
I really hope his son will marry as soon as possible and take the name of his wife, so that he understands he is a complete moron.
There is NO EXCUSE for what they have done, and you can clearly see how they attempt to cope over all the harm they have done to him by buying him a fire wagon and telling him all this pro-circ bullshit, fuck those parents, they don't deserve to have a child.
[–]AirSailer 336 points337 points338 points (46 children) | Copy Link
"My body, my choice" - Modern women referring to themselves
"Your body, my choice" - Modern women referring to men.
[–]YesAmAThrowaway 39 points40 points41 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Mind you this is mainly a US thing in the Western world. Kellogg's propaganda. I'm glad we didn't listen when he proposed pouring acid on vaginas. Why did we listen to him at all though?
[–]FickleCaptain 18 points19 points20 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Dr. Kellogg was horrible but the American Academy of Pediatrics is worse.
https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/American_Academy_of_Pediatrics
[–]YesAmAThrowaway 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
F
[–]suzuki1369 88 points89 points90 points (0 children) | Copy Link
On the nose right here. Just today I got into a debate about it and asked the woman who I was debating with if she was pro-choice. And yes, you guessed it, she was, yet she was kinda coming around at the end luckily. It's just stupid the way men are treated.
[–]Greg468 35 points36 points37 points (30 children) | Copy Link
Dont blame women. Its bad for the movement and also its inaccurate here because both parents circumcise their children unfortunately. Circumcision is the problem not a specific gender
[–]THEAdrian 23 points24 points25 points (3 children) | Copy Link
While the blame isn't solely on women, they do use their own preferences often in influencing that decision. A girl I went to high-school with literally announced on Facebook when she had her son cut and she said, and I quote: "... and your future girlfriends will thank me for it". Wow.
[–]Greg468 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Certainly women also take part in this but solely blaming them for that is wrong
[–]THEAdrian 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Yes. That's why the first words of my post are "while the blame isn't solely on women"... did you not read what I said?
[–]Greg468 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree with you then
[–]craftor708 19 points20 points21 points (8 children) | Copy Link
Wrong. 100% blame women. Women fail the motherhood test of "protect your children" between hours and days after giving birth. Men have the excuse of rationalizing the same abuse done to them.
Can you imagine a woman handing you a newborn baby girl and you thinking "Yeah, lets cut this up a bit".
I absolutely blame women for this.
[–]ABVerageJoe69 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Facts. And whether it is cut up before birth (abortion) or after birth (circumcising), men have little to no agency in the decision.
[–]spaghettbaguett 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I'd say it's about 40, 20, 40
40 from mother's, based on preference and other selfish stuff
10, from uninformed dad's who just know the pro's
50, from religions such as muslim and judaism.
Now, why 50% from religions when most circumcised people aren't jewish or muslim?
Simple. Whenever people try to prevent circumcision at birth, they always dispute it for religious reasons.
[–]Arthuyo 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I'd argue it's 100:100, both are completely to blame.
[–]craftor708 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Or in this thread people put parents trying to protect their children's genitals in the same camp as the anti-vaccine camp.
And i see what you're saying, but i don't like the characterization of X% is your fault, X% is this other person's fault. They aren't mutually exclusive or part of the same pie.
A parent choosing not to protect their kid is responsible for that. A religion indoctrinating and pressuring people and organizations have a whole different level of responsibility and accountability. They aren't mutually exclusive. The parent is as guilty for falling for it as the org is for pushing it. This is a way to make people who fucked up with their kids feel better because its 'not all their fault...'
And I'm not on board with that responsibility dismissing BS.
[–]Greg468 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Certainly women also influence this but solely blaming them is wrong because many men do that to their children as well. Its a societal belief that needs to end though because circumcision on children is a violation of their human rights
[–]craftor708 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
And I am perfectly capable of holding each of those parties accountable separately.
I never said this was solely women's fault or that i blame only them.
I do encourage not diminishing your blame for mother's with sorry excuses like "well its a societal belief" or "many men do too"
Those parties have their own responsibility and that doesn't diminish a mother's failed responsibility towards her sexually mutilated child.
[–]Greg468 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Ok then I agree that both parents are equally responsible for protecting their children.
[–]craftor708 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
with one currently held to a much higher standard than the other for this responsibility
[–]ApprehensiveMail8 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Most states only require the consent of one parent and newborn circumcisions are performed by OB-GYNs. Mom is the patient who directly hired them, dad is some guy with a "visitor" tag.
Guess which parent they ask for consent?
Honestly, rather than banning circumcision outright (which, let's face it, won't happen) significant progress could be made by simply pushing for a system in which both parents really have an equal say.
[–]HPUnicorn 7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
OR make it illegal (like FGM) unless there is an immediate medical requirement.
[–]ApprehensiveMail8 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
That would be banning it outright, and like I said- that won't happen. At least, not in the US anytime soon.
[–]HPUnicorn 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree it won't happen, which is what makes it sad considering any modification of female genitals is outlawed outright AFAIK
[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 5 points6 points7 points (6 children) | Copy Link
I agree this part. Circumcision is often supported by religious groups. Which are one of the few patriarchal institution still left.
Women and feminism are responsible for a lot of men's problems.
But when it comes circumcision, men are the bigger contributing factor.
I feel other men, especially those in power, are worse enemies of men's rights than most women.
[–]MarsaraCaptain7 6 points7 points8 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Why is circumcision a thing in the first place?
[–]craftor708 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Look up CPTSD and Trauma base brainwashing. Basically if you want good cult members damage their genitals and call it an expression of devotion.
[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Its a remnant of patriarchal religious practices.
Feminism fight to 'smash patriarchy'. But they become silent when 'patriarchy' benefits them.
Feminism not only supports MGM, they also support all 'patriarchal' institutions that benefits women. Like alimony, biased child support laws, presumption of paternity (of husband), non-biological fathers paying CS, gender biased rape laws, no punishment for false accusers, make only conscription, etc).
Feminism will never fight to remove patriarchy completely. They only fight where it benefits men. In other areas, they support it.
Same reason why 90% feminist women support marriage, even though its a patriarchal institution too. They specifically oppose aspects of marriage that benefit men, but dont oppose the institution as a whole.
[–]DarthEquus 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
If I may, I would recommend checking out this presentation, Sex and Circumcision: An American Love Story. It is highly informative and should at least provide you with some laughs.
[+]GeNusNeighbor1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Not really it tends to to majority be women and the narrative a lot of them spread.
[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Ya... Very few (top 5%) men typically have financial and political power in any society.
Rest are avg and below avg.
Most women are feminists, but the real problems to men is created by these powerful men who support feminism.
Look at Biden for an example. Once they get power, they dont care for men's rights. 'Rules for thee not for me'.
(That's why I call male feminists worse than most women feminists)
[+]LettuceBeGrateful -14 points-13 points-12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Not only this, but it's often men who are more stubborn about this, because the alternative is to acknowledge circumcision's harms.
Edit: Do the people who downvoted me really think that adamant father syndrome isn't a thing?
[–]craftor708 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah you can see a lot of men in this thread just flat out denying it causes any harm at all.
[–]ApprehensiveMail8 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
When you say "Its bad for the movement" do you mean intactivism or men's rights?
I'm circumcised myself, my oldest son is circumcised, and the TBH the ONLY reason my youngest son is not circumcised is because it became a men's rights issue.
So, if you are an intactivist, yeah, blame the F out of women. Especially on this board. It's your best argument.
[–]Greg468 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I mean for men rights. I am an MRA myself. I dont know what to say about your and yours son's circumcision because idk if it was voluntary or not. If it was involuntary then its certainly bad because people should have the right to do what they want with their body(except for serious health reasons although rare for circumcision).
I dont see how it will be beneficial to blame women for circumcision, They certainly influence circumcision but they dont solely are at fault. Men also circumicise theirs sons because of cultural and religional reasons. Its a societal view carried by both genders, therefore blaming one gender solely is wrong. Many MRAs are against it when feminists are doing it against men and rightly so, and so should we when someone does it against women
[–]ApprehensiveMail8 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Well of course it wasn't voluntary. I couldn't have consented to circumcision as a newborn.
I don't agree with the premise that people should have the right to do what they want with their body. No such right has ever existed and when I hear people say that it does I wonder if people have forgotten what a "right" is.
A right is never a wrong! That's why we call it a "right".
For example, the right to free speech. Telling the truth is always good and never wrong. I struggle to even think of a time that it is wrong. Here's one; yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is wrong if you are incorrect in this belief. Therefore, the right to free speech must be limited to exclude that behavior. We must qualify the statement, because rights must never include wrongs.
Perhaps you are tempted to argue with me on the definition of a right. Before you do let me ask you this; how would it improve the conversation? If we are having a debate about whether something is a right all we are really doing is debating whether that thing is right or wrong. Why muddy the waters?
As far as doing things you want with your body? I can think of plenty of things people might want to do with their bodies that are wrong.
Justly condemned criminals that want to free their bodies from prison before their sentence is up are wrong. Rapists want to do things with their body that are wrong. People with Covid that do not want to wear masks are wrong.
So no, I would not say you have the right to do what you want with your body. You have the right to use your body, and the bodies of others, in ways that are useful.
Now, we were talking about circumcision. Is circumcision useful? I used to think it was, but I was wrong.
"If it were useful, their father would beget them from their mother already circumcised"
-Jesus. Gospel of Thomas 53.
You have a right to have a foreskin. It is never wrong. If you have been circumcised, you have a right to not have a foreskin. That is never wrong.
You do not have the right to circumcise baby boys. That is wrong. Therefore it is not a right.
[–]Greg468 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I did not know you were a newborn when it happened. I am sad this happened to you. Of course our freedom ends when we violate someone else's freedom. And that applies to circumcision of newborn babies which is definetly a violation of human rights. So I agree with you
[–]boxsterguy 6 points7 points8 points (9 children) | Copy Link
You realize this was the father making the decision, right? You can't blame women here. Blame religion.
[–]shlomotrutta 26 points27 points28 points (7 children) | Copy Link
It was not the father making the decision. The parents made a deal: the father would have the children carry his name, the mother would have them have her religion - and thus, she would have all sons circumcised.
And it's not "the Religion" choosing us, we choose our religion.
I cannot oppose male circumcision for certain private reasons. For professional reasons, I would object against it: Even if rare, still too many infants boys die or carry permanent damage from the procedure.
[–]Bascome 11 points12 points13 points (6 children) | Copy Link
We all carry permanent damage. I mean they cut off part of us permanently right?
What part of you can I cut off which you would not consider damaging? Hair and nails excluded of course.
[–]shlomotrutta 5 points6 points7 points (5 children) | Copy Link
What are you trying to tell me?
[–]Bascome 14 points15 points16 points (4 children) | Copy Link
Just a slight correction is all. You said some people mutilated were permanently damaged and I wanted to point out that all people who are mutilated are permanently damaged not just some.
[–]Rawrtherton -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
depends on what’s damage. plenty of other optional body parts are routinely removed like appendix, tonsils, wisdom teeth, adenoids, etc, and i wouldnt consider anyone who has those removed damaged in any sense.
[–]spaghettbaguett 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Appendix: moderately weakens the immune system when removed, and that's excluding side effects.
Tonsils: two to three times increase in upper respiratory tract infections
wisdom teeth: can (rarely) cause permanent side effects such as pain and numbness, when removed.
adenoid: Can't seem to find any side effects, so I'll say very rarely- exclusively side effects from operation going wrong.
[–]Rawrtherton -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
Of course removal of any permanently attached body part has risks. But I still wouldn't call them damaged for undergoing any of these procedures, especially where the benefits are clearly better than the risks (number 1 reason being great danger to your health if you keep them). You can also add in a bunch more procedures to the list (like cancer removal is a huge category).
Is someone who is circumcised damaged? Maybe. I think it's subjective by the person and if they feel damaged. Given that it's a choice made before you have any say, it raises a lot of questions about body rights. But it's also done before the memory formation stage so subjectively, you will never know any difference or have any comparison to make for it.
[–]Bascome 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Good point, I forgot about appendix and tonsils etc.
[–]reddlvr 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
So true!
[–]FickleCaptain 20 points21 points22 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Non-therapeutic circumcision of boys in the United States is a major violation of human and children's rights.
https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/Human_rights
Circumcision of boys is promoted by the medical industry for profit.
https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/Financial_incentive
[–]notahotwaterbottle 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Notice how countries like the UK, Denmark etc.. all have free health care and advise against it as it's an unnecessary procedure.
The minute money's taken out the equation, doctors aren't so favourable of it.
[–]HiBiGuyYYC 55 points56 points57 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I’m Croatian and uncut - in Europe and most places in the world, that’s the norm. Here in YYC I’ve run into some chick who are cuuunts about it. Openly talking about how it’s so gross. I would never insult a chick on her body but how is that any different?
[–]Takithereal 17 points18 points19 points (0 children) | Copy Link
This. Imagine saying to a girl, hey I met this girl from xy country and she had female genital mutilation. Oh after that I can't imagine being with a girl who hasn't been cut. Reverse the roles and we got these girls. If we don't accept it one way, we shouldn't the other way.
[–]HiBiGuyYYC 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Everyone has a right to personal preferences, those aren’t any of my business, but to be at a public pub and be a drunk while girl going on and on about how gross uncut dicks are is not ok. Beyond the fact that body shaming anyone is gross, whatever happened to manners and belong polite nice people? i am by no means a sensitive sally, i am always making some kind of smart ass comment or joke but for some dumb bitch to have such visceral hate towards dicks like mine felt like it crossed the line. Honey, if his dick was unclean it’s not because of the foreskin, it’s because he has bad hygiene in general.
[–]Noob_master_slayer 116 points117 points118 points (7 children) | Copy Link
Female circumcision is called female genital mutilation, yet male circumcision is just circumcision, not male genital mutilation.
Clown world we live in.
[+]Rickterr -13 points-12 points-11 points (6 children) | Copy Link
To be fair, although they are both forms of genital mutilation, they are pretty different, one is the removal of skin, the other of the erogenous zone itself, i don't believe either should be performed on infants, but to an extent there are a few situations in which male circumcision is sort of justifiable, mostly due to morphological anomalies of the Foreskin.
[–]pablitosocool 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
i just checked in with Maury Povich on this and he told me that the lie detector determined that this is a lie.
[–]PrimoXiAlpha 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I mean if there was a medical reason like one of my friend had (he was around 18 or 19) then that is no problem. I am just against circumcision for no medical reason when it comes to kids.
[–]Noob_master_slayer 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
You're wrong. "FGM" as it's called comes in many levels. Some tribes in Africa practice an extreme form by removing the entire clitoris, and by narrowing down the vaginal entry, causing extreme difficulty during sex. That's truly fucked up, I concur.
BUT.
There are other forms of "FGM", in which the clitoral hood, the analogus organ to the FORESKIN, is removed or nicked slightly. Removal of the clitoral hood, which is much more common and is practiced in Arab states, is equivalent to the male "circumcision", and isn't any worse or better.
Yet it is STILL banned, yes, even slightly piercing (NOT removing) the clitoral hood is considered "mutilation", whereas removal of the ENTIRE foreskin is considered OK.
There have been multiple studies that show that foreskin removal reduces sensitity, and of course it does, the foreskin contains over 10,000-20,000 nerves!!!
Yet we still are okay with it, and WHO (fuck you) recommends it whilst simulatenously banning even slight piercing of the clitoral hood!
This all stems from fucking political correctness. Western society, and WHO, are too scared to offend Jews and Muslims, hence MGM is allowed but FGM isn't.
[–]Noob_master_slayer 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
To those that say that penile sensitity isn't reduced, let me give you an anecdote.
So I have done a few studies on this topic in which I learnt from my Muslim male friends that they can at most orgasm 2-3 times a day, and they usually feel any physical enjoyment only seconds before climax.
Yet, I have asked my non-muslim friends who obviously aren't circumcised. They've told me that they can easily orgasm more than 5-6 times a day, a number almost none of my Muslim friends have ever matched. They also reported significantly continuous pleasure from flaccid to climax, which none of my Muslims friends reported.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Good on you for not supporting it, but you're completely wrong about what is involved.
Circumcision is not just "removal of skin." All of the most sensitive parts of the penis are in the foreskin, and the removal of them further desensitizes the remaining parts, which are supposed to be covered and protected at all times (much like how the clitoris is).
[–]SweatyAdvance 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
To be even more fair, there are more than one form of FGM, and the most common is just a ritualistic pin prick. And it's not just the removal of skin. That's an incredibly uninformed position.
[–]michaelscott1776 45 points46 points47 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Jesus Christ this is just horrible
[–]Sephir-7 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
He was probably circumcised as well
[+]ASexual-Buff-Baboon1 points [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
I didn’t circumcise my son. When he gets older I’ll probably have to explain why I am.
[–]thwip62 9 points10 points11 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Better than explaining to your son why he's cut.
[+]ASexual-Buff-Baboon1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Yea. I’m glad my gf said I should make the decision.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
So she would allow you to have her baby mutilated? I hope you haven't knocked her up already. She doesn't sound like a keeper.
[–]JimmyFett 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Same here. I've just told them that I was circumcised because things were different when I was a baby. They are being raised voluntarist so it's not such a stretch for them.
[–]IHaveTheSquirts 45 points46 points47 points (3 children) | Copy Link
The circumcision issue sums up men's issues perfectly for me.
In the first days of his life, a newborn baby is put on a table, and part of his penis is removed for no actual relevant health-related reason, often without anesthetic, and in a procedure that causes more than 100 neonatal deaths annually in the United States alone.
...and people are generally OK with this.
It's hard to be optimistic for men's issues when so many of them are for mutilating tiny baby boys. Many men's issues like sentencing disparities, homelessness rates, workplace deaths, suicide rates ... yeah. If people aren't willing to stop this happening to baby boys, I sincerely doubt these issues will get the attention they deserve.
[–]craftor708 7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Couple with studies that baby boys are left to "cry it out" at a much higher rate than girls. Seriously, they time how quickly parents respond to crying, there's a massive difference. And so now he's got his penis being tortured, dealing with the healing without painkillers, and his primary caregivers are leaving him alone to work through it. All before a year old.
And people wonder why some men are fucked up mentally when it comes to emotions and bonding and shit. Literally born into a HOW DARE YOU CRY ABOUT THE SEXUAL ABUSE I'M GIVING YOU world.
[–]IHaveTheSquirts 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Ugh, that's horrible. My son is a year old and we just ... didn't use cry it out. We stayed with him and comforted him until he fell asleep. When he wakes up and cries in the night I go and comfort him back to sleep.
[–]craftor708 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah the cry it out method only really teaches children that people aren't going to come to help you when you think you're in pain and are asking for help.
Love to hear of some wholesome care-giving. Sounds like we need more Squirts around being parents.
[–]Austromarxist 101 points102 points103 points (7 children) | Copy Link
"Two women told me that sex is better with circumcised men." Wow, your infant son must be so grateful...
[–]fgyoysgaxt 86 points87 points88 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Mutilating baby boys for the sexual pleasure of women.
You can't make this stuff up. There's such a disconnect between us treating baby boys like this while teaching baby girls that their body is theirs and theirs alone, they aren't made for male approval let alone for male pleasure.
Disgusting.
[–]Noob_master_slayer 47 points48 points49 points (5 children) | Copy Link
It all revolves around women. They apparently like it circumcised, hence men SHOULD be circumcised to satisfy kqweens.
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points (4 children) | Copy Link
No, it's an American thing. English women find it to be a grotesque morally inexcusable mutilation and a betrayal of parental trust.
[–]Noob_master_slayer 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Really? It kind of shocks me. As per research, only 37% of the world is circumcised, yet look at porn for instance, almost 99% of commercially produced porn features a circumcised penis!
[–]DarthVeigar_ 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Because majority of porn is American. If you watch European porn you'd find majority of the men aren't circumcised.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yep, it's just American porn. I watch mostly European and Asian porn and I rarely see mutilated men.
[–]Arkyance 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Japanese, Vietnamese, Australian, and Canadian women are all on that page too.
I uhhh, have a diverse set of friends. And no filter.
[–]GG1312 8 points9 points10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I was circumcised when I was days old, and I wish I could go back.
[–]craftor708 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
You and millions of others, buddy.
[–]OperativeTracer 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Same.
[–]Yoshiezibz 8 points9 points10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I hate it when people say it looks nicer of sex is better, fuck off.
If a natural penis is a turn off for you, you are too immature for sex.
[–]craftor708 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Or so selfish about your own sexual gratification you don't care about the harm it causes others.
[s] You know what'd be great? If just every woman let me screw them rawdog whenever i wanted. The sex is just better. You know what? Lets do it when they're babies so they're used to it when they grow up. [/s]
It's a line of thinking that shows a lack of empathy more than anything else.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Sure darling, you can mutilate our baby. After the birth you'll have a pussy like a broken cat-flap so I'll be taking you up the ass every day and I won't use lube because I need a bit of friction to get me off. That sounds fair, sweetheart.
And if a natural penis is a turn off maybe they're a lesbian. Mutilation doesn't look better and the sex is worse for the woman as well as for the man.
[–]homo__schedule 30 points31 points32 points (1 child) | Copy Link
r/intactivism for more discussions btw.
[–]Selphia2000[S] 17 points18 points19 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree, it's where I saw this post originally. One of the few genuinely good subs.
[–]lmbadatthis 18 points19 points20 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I’m having my first son today. He will not be circumcised.
[–]Selphia2000[S] 11 points12 points13 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Thank you
Sincerely, thank you
I hope the birth goes well
[–]lmbadatthis 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Thank you! I’m sure it will go smoothly. Literally typing this from the bedside. The girlfriend is in high spirits and luckily still laughing at my jokes.
[–]daytoncarter 27 points28 points29 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Honestly, this is shocking.
[+]MRRamming -11 points-10 points-9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Is it really?
[–]Selphia2000[S] 10 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Did you even read the post?
[–]MRRamming 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes and the father's reasons didn't suprise me at all
[–]hyzermofo 42 points43 points44 points (0 children) | Copy Link
You mean "male genital mutilation". That's what it is.
[–]starwarsgeek1985 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Can someone explain to me why a circumcision is good or bad. I know what it is. But I don't know much about why it's done
[–]craftor708 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It's the removal of some parts of the penis, specifically the foreskin that is a protective layer but also has a shitton of nerves.
Its popular because of the jewish religion and Kellog (yes the guy who made the cereal) pushed it a hundred years ago because he wanted men to have less sex and do more work, and circumcision makes the penis lose a lot of feeling.
Edit: Dunno your gender, but the female equivalent of the standard circumcision procedure would be cutting away the skin covering and around the clitoris so its more exposed and rubs on underwear and clothing, and loses even more sensitivity by building up callouses to protect itself. Doing this to a female will land you life in prison in most countries, btw.
[–]DarthEquus 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
If I may, I would recommend checking out this presentation, Sex and Circumcision: An American Love Story. It is highly informative and should at least provide you with some laughs.
[–]thegreatwill39 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
This made my stomach turn. My heart goes out to Elijah. No boy should have to endure all that pain.
[–]AHortler8418 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Unbelievable. Legitimately makes me angry
[–]a_fricking_cunt 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
circumcision should only have medical reason behind, like phimosis
[–]Selphia2000[S] 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
And even then, phimosis has other treatments.
As someone who suffers from phimosis, I am still against circumcision as a widespread practice.
[–]a_fricking_cunt 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes yes, Im circumcised because i had a very severe case of phimosis (peeing was a painful thing to do) but circumcicsng children is horrible
[–]Greg_W_Allan 48 points49 points50 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, they felated the infant's newly mutilated genitals.
Author is a sadistic paedophile.
[–]Uncle_gruber 12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
I just can't get over that part. Its such a strange way of saying "the surgeon sucked the blood off the end of your penis".
[–]SonOfHibernia 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
This has caused massive outbreaks of herpes among baby boys in some Jewish communities
[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Um... it’s talked about relentlessly on this sub.
[–]craftor708 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
And its still not enough. We should do more than talking, perhaps.
[–]Tammas_Dexter 11 points12 points13 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Circumcision was popularised in western culture by John Harvey kellogg as a way of making sex less pleasurable so that men would be more productive. His cereal was actually also a way of just making life in general less pleasurable. Really interesting character, he was a vegetarian, died a virgin, all his kids were adopted, iirc he also supported eugenics. He was one of those people who believed everyone had limited life energy and doing pleasurable things like eating nice food and having sex shortened your life by using up that life energy.
[–]DarthEquus 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Kellogg wasn't the only one either
1860
Athol A. W. Johnson. On An Injurious Habit Occasionally Met with in Infancy and Early Childhood, The Lancet, vol. 1 (7 April 1860): pp. 344-345.
1871
M. J. Moses, The Value of Circumcision as a Hygienic and Theraputic Measure, NY Medical Journal, vol.14 (1871): pp.368-374.
1887
Lewis L. Sayer, MD, Circumcision for the Cure of Enuresis, Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 7 1887. pp.631-633.
Angel Money. Treatment of Disease In Children, Philidelphia: P. Blakiston, 1887. p.421.
1888
John Harvey Kellog, inventor of Corn Flakes, Treatment for Self-Abuse and Its Effects, Plain Facts for Old and Young, Burlington, Iowa: P. Segner & Co. 1888, p. 295.
1891
Jefferson C. Crossland. The Hygiene of Circumcision. New York Medical Journal 1891;53:484-485
Jonathan Hutchinson, On Circumcision as Preventative of Masturbation, Archives of Surgery, vol. 2 (1891): pp. 267-268.
1894
Peter Remondino, On Negro Rapes and their Social Problems, The National Popular Review, vol. 4 (1894): p. 3.
1895
Charles E. Fisher, Circumcision, in A Hand-Book On the Diseases of Children and Their Homeopathic Treatment, Chicago: Medical Century Co., 1895. p.875.
E.J.Spratling, Masturbation in the Adult, Medical Record, vol. 24. (1895): pp. 442-443.
1896
Editor, Medical Record, Circumscisus, Medical Record, vol. 49 (1896): p.430.
1897
S. G. A. Brown, A Plea for Circumcision, Medical World, vol. 15 (1897): pp/124-125.
Emmett L. Holt. The Diseases Of Infancy And Childhood. New York: D. Appleton. 1897:696-698.
1898
N. Bergman, Report of a Few Cases of Circumcision, Journal of Orificial Surgery, vol. 7 (1898): pp.249-251.
1900
Editor, Medical News. Our London Letter. Medical World,(1900).vol.77:pp.707-8
E. Harding Freeland, Circumcision as a Preventative of Syphilis and Other Disorders, The Lancet, vol. 2 (29 Dec. 1900): pp.1869-1871.
1901
Ernest G. Mark, Circumcision, American Practitioner and News, vol. 31 (1901): p. 231.
H. G. H. Naylor, A Plea for Early Circumcision, Pediatrics, vol. 12 (1901): p. 231
1902
W.G.Steele, MD. Importance of Circumcision, Medical World, vol. 20 (1902): pp.518-519.
[–]DarthEquus 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
1903
Brandsford Lewis. A Plain Talk on Matters Pertaining to Genito-Urinary Anatomy, Physiology and Diseases (Part 1). American Journal of Dermatology and Genito-Urinary Diseases 1903;7:201-209.
1912
E. H. Pratt, Circumcision, Orificial Surgery: Its Philosophy, Application and Technique, Edited by B. E. Dawson. Newark: Physicians Drug News Co. (1912). pp. 396-398.
Lydston G. Frank, Sex Hygiene for the Male Chicago: Riverton Press, 1912.
1914
A.L. Wolbarst, MD. Universal Circumcision as a Sanitary Measure, Journal of the American Medical Association, (1914) Vol.62. pp.92-97.
1915
L.W. Wuesthoff, MD. Benefits of Circumcision, Medical World, (1915) Vol.33. p.434.
William J. Robinson, Circumcision and Masturbation, Medical World, vol.33 (1915): p.390.
1917
The People's Home Library, A Library of Three Practical books by Published by R.C Barnum Company Copyright 1917
1920
L. Solomons, MD. For and Against Circumcision, British Medical Journal, (June 5, 1920), p.768.
1928
Editor, Routine Circumcision at Birth?, Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 91 (1928): p.201.
1935
R.W. Cockshut. Circumcision, British Medical Journal, Vol.2 (1935): p.764.
1941
Alan F. Guttmacher, Should the Baby Be Circumcised?, Parents Magazine, vol.16 (1941): pp.26, 76-78.
1953
Richard L. Miller. Donald C. Snyder. Immediate Circumcision of the Newborn Male. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1953;65:1-11.
1969
Morris Fishbein. Modern Home Medical Advisor. New York: Doubleday. (1969) p. 115.
1970
Meredith F. Campbell. The Male Genital Tract and the Female Urethra. in: Campbell's Urology. vol. 2. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company. 1970:1836.
[–]JerichoCrusher 13 points14 points15 points (14 children) | Copy Link
I was circumcised as a baby and nothing bad happened but I don't believe I'll be doing the same if I ever have a son in the future
[–]old_walnut 40 points41 points42 points (9 children) | Copy Link
Yeah that’s not how the penis works my friend :) If you are circumcised, you have lost over half of your pleasurable nerve endings, your glans has callouses (keratinized) and is no longer a moist membrane. Imagine eating delicate cuisine with a dry, callous tongue.
Men that are circumcised as an adult report 80-90% reduction in sensation after the procedure: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7AaUb63NLLw
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I mean, why should he miss what he's never known? He's gonna break the cycle so that should be the thing that really matters.
[–]kbaltimore22 -3 points-2 points-1 points (7 children) | Copy Link
This was disproven on a science versus podcast I thought.
Start at 24 minutes: https://open.spotify.com/episode/1wMso1MxQQtavQzLrUJQqU?si=tLHX7GviRxO7H5x_MjDhAw&context=spotify%3Ashow%3A5lY4b5PGOvMuOYOjOVEcb9
[–]old_walnut 5 points6 points7 points (6 children) | Copy Link
Unfortunately, no. Please check out a fact based documentary on it: https://www.amazon.com/American-Circumcision-Marilyn-Milos/dp/B07DW9M34K/ref=nodl_
[+]kbaltimore22 -9 points-8 points-7 points (5 children) | Copy Link
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1wMso1MxQQtavQzLrUJQqU?si=tLHX7GviRxO7H5x_MjDhAw&context=spotify%3Ashow%3A5lY4b5PGOvMuOYOjOVEcb9
Start at 24 minutes: 1. Does it reduce UTIs in male babies: yes 2. Does it reduce the likely hood of STDs: yes 3. Are their risks to the surgery: Yes, but low risk 4. Does it reduce sexual satisfaction: Unlikely, based on a study of men who were circumcised later in life it did not impact sexual satisfaction. 5. Does it reduce the amount of nerve ends: yes, however this did not translate to reduced sensitivity. 6. Do doctors recommend: yes, the American pediatrics association state the benefits outweigh the risks; however, not enough that it should be required.
[–]old_walnut 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
Watch the documentary. It covers these topics in a much more accurate and fair light. Or this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Intactivism/comments/hxmbpn/refutations_of_the_alleged_benefits_of_infant/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
[–]kbaltimore22 -3 points-2 points-1 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Everything in the podcast is sited. There were over 100 citations. Plus the podcast is fact checked.
[–]craftor708 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
So is what this guy is posting. Your one source doesn't invalidate all the others. If you'd like to post a specific source countering the claim, feel free, but posting the same source with "No, i promise, its credible!" means nothing.
BTW, bible has billions of citations, and is 'fact checked' by people. Doesn't make it a valid source in this case.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
I can show you podcasts with citations from a doctor of physics who shows "proof" that the government is hiding a secret Planet X which is close to Earth and will soon cause the destruction of this entire planet.
[–]kbaltimore22 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
Here are the citations. Look through them and you’ll see it’s not some dr. In physics talking about Planet X. I think the problem is your minds made up and you don’t want to listen to something that doesn’t align with your beliefs and to be clear, I’m vehemently against circumecumsin bc it’s unnecessary mutilation. I was simply pointing that a lot of what’s preached on mensrights is overblown.
Btw there were 69 citations but they didn’t all fit in this reply and I’m too lazy to post multiple times about this.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTmb_Ikz7L9dGobAuFKbk9hM-M06HnUIuBlY_2SaKpo3cA7Zp2ngYjz8x2ldyKe3D0W7yZyO07-Cmyw/pub
[1] http://bio.csmc.edu/view/3561/Andrew-L-Freedman.aspx [2]Pg 1, Circumcision: A History of the World’s Most Controversial Surgery Gollaher David [3] The technique of circumcision is very old and the first documented evidences of this practice are dated as early as the third millennium BC. [4] Circumcision: A History of the World’s Most Controversial Surgery Gollaher David pg 99 [5] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6034a4.htm Incidence of NMC decreased from 62.5% in 1999 to 56.9% in 2008 in NHDS (AAPC = -1.4%; p<0.001), from 63.5% in 1999 to 56.3% in 2008 in NIS (AAPC = -1.2%; p<0.001), and from 58.4% in 2001 to 54.7% in 2010 in CDM (AAPC = -0.75%; p<0.001) (Figure). [6] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/circumcision_2013/circumcision_2013.pdf See Figure 2 [7] https://med.stanford.edu/newborns/professional-education/circumcision/mogen-clamp-technique.html [8] Circumcised newborn males had a higher risk for wounds, correctional procedures, inflammation, and bleeding compared with uncircumcised newborn male….among the extremely rare but serious AEs occurring only among circumcised newborns (but once or none among uncircumcised newborns), we found 0 cases of complete amputation of penis, 1 case of stricture of male genital organs, 3 cases of partial amputation of penis, 4 cases of replantation of penis, and 16 cases of suture of artery. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/1870232 [9] Significant acute complications are rare, occurring in approximately 1 in 500 newborn male circumcisions. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/130/3/e756.full.pdf pg 772 [10] “Our data suggest that the rate of AEs associated with newborn circumcision is less than 0.5%.” https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/1870232 [11] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/130/3/e756.full.pdf There are no evidence-based recommendations that state there is persistent pain that must be treated after the local preprocedure anesthetic wears off. [12] The inner foreskin is almost certainly the key site of sexual transmission HIV and other STIs in males. The reason for this is that it has a mucosal surface and thus a thinner a less protective epithelial surface. Removal of this tissue thus removes a key transmission site." Email. [13] Important uropathogens colonise the preputium in uncircumcised male children. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lokman_Irkilata/publication/296333305_Preputial_bacterial_colonisation_in_uncircumcised_male_children_Is_it_related_to_phimosis/links/56d55e9d08aefd177b1175c3/Preputial-bacterial-colonisation-in-uncircumcised-male-children-Is-it-related-to-phimosis.pdf [14] http://mbio.asm.org/content/4/2/e00076-13.full [15] http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0008422 The anoxic microenvironment of the subpreputial space may support pro-inflammatory anaerobes that can activate Langerhans cells to present HIV to CD4 cells in draining lymph nodes. Thus, the reduction in putative anaerobic bacteria after circumcision may play a role in protection from HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. [16] https://sci-hub.tw/10.1159/000077117In conclusion, the preputium causes uropathogenic bacterial colonization in the periurethral region in the case of a normal urethral opening. The real reservoir site is the inner surface of the preputium in the coronal sulcus region. Circumcision helps to reduce the incidence and rate of this colonization by supplying the localization of normal skin flora. [17] We conclude that during the first 6 months of life, the presence of a foreskin is associated with a greater quantity of periurethral bacteria and a greater likelihood for the presence of, as well as higher concentrations of, potentially uropathogenic organisms. https://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(88)80625-5/abstract [18] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4192839/ HIV mechanism review [19] https://journals.lww.com/pidj/Abstract/2008/04000/Prevalence_of_Urinary_Tract_Infection_in.4.aspx [20] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3725505; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4914380 [21] Getting treatment right away for an infection in your child’s urethra or bladder can prevent a kidney infection. A kidney infection can develop from an infection that moves upstream to one or both kidneys. Kidney infections are often very painful and can be dangerous and cause serious health problems, so it’s best to get early treatment when your child has a bladder infection. [22] “it is estimated that 7 to 14 of 1000 uncircumcised male infants will develop a UTI during the first year of life, compared with 1 to 2 infants among 1000 circumcised male infants” http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/130/3/e756.full.pdf [23] The first paper suggesting a protective effect of MC against HIV infection was published in 1986 [5]. Since then, many observational studies have been published, some of which have observed that most men living in East and southern Africa, the regions with the highest prevalence of HIV, are not circumcised [1–3] http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020298 [24] See pg 4 http://spot.colorado.edu/~tooley/EFS2008_UG.pdf [25]https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2815149/&sa=D&ust=1527618808172000&usg=AFQjCNFzPIceaYn8ljwToTsyI-uHoCL7Ig [26]https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/oxfam/bitstream/10546/111924/5/access-antiretroviral-therapy-uganda-070303-en.pdf “
“Recent (2002) estimates place the number of HIV-infected Ugandans at between 1.5 and 2 million. According to the United Nations AIDS Programme (UNAIDS), between 5,000 and 10,000 HIV-infected people are currently on antiretroviral therapy, which includes patients on both branded and generic drugs.” [27] “Since 2001, the international effort to scale up antiretroviral therapy (ART) in the developing world has been one of the most important programmes in global health” https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1744-8603-7-33 [28] Yet, despite the many interventions addressing HIV/AIDS and dramatic price reductions of ARVs, only a minority of the infected population is currently receiving treatment, and promises of universal coverage for all who need it seem unrealistic.https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/84524 [29] A number of ecological and observational studies, mainly from sub-Saharan Africa, have suggested that male circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection in men.1–5 http://sci-hub.tw/https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(07)60313-4/fulltext
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Thats a bad argument a lot of people use "Im circumcised and Im fine" or "Im circumcised and I like it". Literally does not give you the right to mutilate a baby
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
To be fair, he did say he wouldn't mutilate his children. But, yeah, he has no idea what he's lost or how much better sex would've been.
[–]JerichoCrusher 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Sex is pretty good so yeah I can only imagine
[–]JerichoCrusher 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Ik it's abbad argument and I'm saying that even though I'm fine doesn't mean I don't see it's a bad idea now
[–]meemeeeby 7 points8 points9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
yeah i need a tldr explanation cause i am to retarded to read it all
[–]Selphia2000[S] 17 points18 points19 points (2 children) | Copy Link
TL;DR
Man and woman has their child circumcised 2 years after he was born for religious reasons. It leads to various medical complications and the child being in pain for a long time. Father tries to justify why he mutilated his son's penis permanently.
Worth a full read though if you have the time
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Slight correction - the woman wanted it for religious reasons. The man let her do it so that she'd let the child have his surname. He shouldn't have impregnated that monster, but if it was an accident then he could've let the kid change his name when he turned 18. I'm sure the kid would've done so happily after finding out the reason why he didn't have his father's name. Names change. Body parts don't grow back.
[–]meemeeeby 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
ahh thanks for the tldr man very kind of you
[+]Remarkable_School_191 points [recovered] (13 children) | Copy Link
What an eye opening thread. I had both of my boys circumcised mostly because that is what I thought you were supposed to do. I also remember being kind of weirded out dating a guy that was uncircumcised. I usually fancy myself as a very progressive person but the issues this thread has brought up have literally never crossed my mind. How offended would I be if a guy was weirded out by the natural form of my body? Shame on our society
[–]0mnica 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
FTFY
Don't deflect, you made the decision based on what other people said and your own bias.
[–]thwip62 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm glad you can see this. A lot of people either don't get it, or double down on their arguments.
[–]MostLikelyPoopingRN 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
You really didn’t think to do even 5 minutes of research before mutilating your baby boys? Also while it’s good you’re realizing this now, you’re deflecting all blame away from yourself to „society“.
[–]Selphia2000[S] 11 points12 points13 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Your children are victims of tradition. Thank you for realising that what you did was wrong, even if you're not to blame for societal expectations
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
She's to blame.
[–]craftor708 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Agreed, this is her own failure to recognize society was harming her child, through her. Recognizing it's a larger issue does not absolve her of responsibility for this. It will cause lifelong psychological damage, and handwaving it away as "Oh they're victims of tradition!" is just a terrible way of dismissing their trauma and shifting blame away from the person explicitly responsible for their protection and care.
[–]rdomalik 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
You were supposed to protect your sons. You failed. You should know that you have caused them the worst suffering they are likely to experience in their lifetimes. And for the rest of their lives they will be sexually dysfunctional. Because of you.
[+]Remarkable_School_191 points [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
My goal was not to dismiss myself of the blame but you're mistaken if you think that culture and tradition has nothing to do with the fact that around 80% of Americans make the same decision I did. The first time around, I was an 18 year old statistic and honestly was so scared about the entire situation that no, I didn't do any research and simply did what was known to me and their father. The second time around I was 7 years older, maybe slightly wiser and did look at the pros and cons of doing it. Most of the information I read at the time and received from health care practitioners was that it was a personal choice but did help with cleanliness.
The first time I was ever clued into the fact that it may be cruel and barbaric was during a clinical rotation in nursing school, after my children were born, when I saw a circumcision first hand. I have grown since those decisions were made and wouldn't make the same decision now.
I support your fight for men's rights but if you think that the best way to go about creating change is to shame each individual reddit user for their choice versus addressing the real issues, I feel like you're not going to go far.
[–]craftor708 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
If my religion required raping baby girls 8 days after birth, me saying "Well everyone was doing it" means jack shit. I participated in the harm, and i would be responsible. In court, sure you would call it a mitigating circumstance, but we're not in court. You're a mother responsible for caring for your children, and you irreversibly harmed them due to your own poor judgement.
We can hold both society responsible for encouraging this and you responsible for personally doing it. They're not mutually exclusive.
Edit: I know there was a lot of conflicting information and medical professionals saying its fine and all that. But if all those things existed for my raping baby girls example, would it in any way excuse a father raping his baby daughter? Its a sexual assault of an even more permanent kind than what we'd call the average rape, just looking at objective harm to the body, and I'm not really trying to say one is worse than the other, what i'm trying to point out is the level of apathy towards genital mutilation of men, versus visceral reaction towards unwanted sex to a woman.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Oh, this is strange. The woman appears to have deleted her posts after she didn't receive validation or a procession of white knights telling her she was a stunning and brave innocent victim of systemic systems of structural institutions. How unusual.
The most terrifying thing is that I vaguely remember her saying something about how she was training to be a nurse. I hope it's not in paediatrics.
[–]craftor708 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
lol right?
Shouldn't be laughing, she has a high potential to cause harm.
[–]69_Watermelon_420 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It is absolutely your fault, and you should absolutely be shamed because of it. You mutilated your own children for the rest of their lives, which is pretty barbaric, even if "80%" of Americans do it. I'm sure a majority people supported slavery throughout ancient history, but we can still call slavery barbaric.
Second, you were so childish to "be weirded out" by a guy who was uncircumcised, yet you wrote this
This is pretty ironic considering you were a teen mom and you obviously weren't emotionally ready because you were weirded out by a guy who literally had nothing wrong with him.
[–]openrds 4 points5 points6 points (9 children) | Copy Link
For those men who've been cut and want to consider restoring your foreskin, there are some methods you can check out.
r/foreskin_restoration
Restoring Men
[–]craftor708 1 point2 points3 points (8 children) | Copy Link
I understand this can help some people, but it's bullshit. Its all about stretching existing skin to try and recover functionality, but the nerves that were severed never grow back.
Edit: It also means wearing an painful penis stretching device for hours basically every day, or the skin stretches back to normal
[–]old_walnut 2 points3 points4 points (7 children) | Copy Link
That’s not quite accurate. Restoring devices should not be painful at all, and once you have restored you no longer need to wear the devices. Additionally, restoring will do two major things: the keratinization of the glans will slowly slough off and your numb glans will be returned to it’s natural state, and it will become a wet membrane again with full coverage all day. People that are fully restored report returning 90+% of their pre-circumcision feeling! I have restored for a few months now and have already had a very obvious improvement in sexual experience and reduced my need for pills just to stay hard from lack of feeling anything.
[–]craftor708 4 points5 points6 points (6 children) | Copy Link
You bring up some good benefits, however when i looking into the hanging and vacuum clamps and user stories, they were clearly uncomfortable and often painful, and that it is something you have to continually upkeep.
And those user reports of 90% feeling back i wouldn't trust even if you had posted a source, because those nerve endings DO NOT grow back. It's stretched scar tissue, not even close to the same thing.
All that being said, I'm glad it worked for you, and it may not be as useless as i'd previously believed.
[–]old_walnut 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
The devices gave gotten a lot better in the last year or two from what I can tell. I’ve used 4 different devices and lots of people report different ones working better for them.
Yeah the nerve endings don’t regrow. But imagine your tongue being dried out and calloused from rubbing on clothing for 20 years, and what food would taste like. Compare that to what your tongue is designed to do as a wet membrane. That’s what we can get back.
[–]craftor708 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Got some good personal recommendations?
[–]old_walnut 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
The ForeSkinned device is brand new and has been getting rave reviews, I have a few of their models on order. I personally have a TLC-X, a Stealth Retainer with weights, and some rings, other retainers, etc. I struggle with the TLC device slipping off, but the stealth device is very rock solid and can be much cheaper. with weights it will restore outer skin well.
[–]craftor708 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
ah.. Yeah they're who i looked into.
[–]openrds 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Lots of people are in the restoring community, so it’s clearly working for some people. There’s also a lot of new devices hitting the market. Take a look[Restoring Resources](www.restoringmenlifecoaching.com/foreskin-restoration-resources)
[+]WinterSoldier551 -7 points-6 points-5 points (11 children) | Copy Link
Now I may seem a bit stupid, but what is so wrong with circumcision? Just asking a general question, not taking either side.
[–]old_walnut 20 points21 points22 points (0 children) | Copy Link
So much- watch the free amazon documentary: https://www.amazon.com/American-Circumcision-Marilyn-Milos/dp/B07DW9M34K/ref=nodl_
Over half of your nerve endings get cut off in the procedure. They haveto stimulate the baby’s penis to make it erect first before they can attach the clamp (rape.) they haveto tear the membrane that keeps the glans safe and protected as a newborn. The procedure removes several pleasure zones. The procedure actively is designed to reduce pleasure and eliminate the ability to masturbate without lubricants to keep men godly.
[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It's about 'his body, his choice'....
Even if its for religious purpose, it can be done once he turns 18.
By doing it in infancy, you are taking that choice away from him.
Gender equality and 'my body, my choice' applies to both genders. And under all circumstances..
Selective approach to gender equality is what we call 'feminism'.
[–]fatpieceofshite 18 points19 points20 points (5 children) | Copy Link
The foreskin protects the head from rubbing on shit over time, it basically takes away a lot of the feeling on the head if you get circumcised. Like a lot a lot
[–]PorkBomber 6 points7 points8 points (4 children) | Copy Link
Forget about the head, foreskin itself has ton of nerves and provides more sensation and pleasure than the head. Cutting it off basically kills your pleasure almost entirely. No wonder why so many men think women get more pleasure from sex lol.
[–]fatpieceofshite 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, probably not as much that they think it, rather they just don't get as much. (If they're circumcised ofc)
[+]BingSerious -6 points-5 points-4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
| Cutting it off basically kills your pleasure almost entirely.
This is definitely not true.
[–]SonOfHibernia 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Sex usually feels pretty fuckin good whether your circumcised or not. The circumcised just have no idea what they’re missing so they can’t make a comparison
[–]BingSerious -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
Only guys circumcised after sex can compare. No one else.
But I wasn't comparing anything, I was disputing the idea that it kills all sexual pleasure, which - I'll say it again despite the stupid downvotes - is definitely wrong.
[–]shlomotrutta 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Not only is the loss of over half of the nerve endings and the removal of the protective foreskin a problem; baby boys die as a result of having their foreskin removed. Circumcision-related mortality rates are estimated to be at 9 per 100,000, or about 1.3% of male neonatal deaths from all causes. The boy in this case was lucky.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
There are many cases of genitally mutilated men not being able to have orgasms when they reach middle age or older. Mutilation might be barely tolerable for some younger men but as function decreases with age, or after years of repetitive marital sex, orgasm becomes increasingly difficult.
It's also a grotesque unnatural amputation.
[–]girraween -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
https://youtu.be/D_3LQjZgdbQ
This is the best video I’ve seen explaining the whole thing.
[+]KiwiPoilu1 points [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link
I'm circumcised because my father is muslim ( I'm not anymore ). I don't mind it much and I don't ressent my parents for it even tho sometimes I wonder how it would've felt like with that bit of skin. I feel like this sub you crossposted is very extreme and don't represent at all the major population of people that were circumcized. They also dramaticize a lot on the effects going as far as pretending a circumcized man can't take pleasure, that they can't satisfy women and are less desirable which is obviously bs. Also, a lot of posters have 0 activity elsewhere on reddit so it's kinda sus.
I am still against circumcizions under parental pressure, I would not call it a mutilation since done properly it is a good hygiena operation but children can't consent and it's still a body modification
[–]Frosty-Gate-8094 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
We are against infant circumcision.
Any adult man is free to make that choice for himself. Doing it on infants violates their consent. And takes away the choice that they can make later in life.
In USA 90% MGM are non-religious.
[–]KiwiPoilu 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree with this
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (3 children) | Copy Link
What most of us believe here about male genital mutilation is that it shouldn't be done to children no matter what, they can decide when they are an adult. Also so far many research has disproved the idea that is medically good to have your son's genital mutilated. Also doing so reduces pleasure during s*x, as a lot of nerve endings are cut off in the process. And some parents do it because "their future wife/girlfriend will like it and thank us for it", basically mutilating a boys genital for the pleasure of women. Also female genital mutilation is illegal in many places, even though male is more dangerous.
[+]KiwiPoilu -6 points-5 points-4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Did you read my comment ? You are not answering what I said. I know it doesn’t have any medical impact although one can argue hygiena can fall under those criterias. I didn’t say you didn’t loose some please pleasure by doing it. I also finished my comment by agreeing with the fact it should not be allowed for minors. Also, I would not compare it to female mutilation since the two are nowhere near close in term of gravity. Lastly I don’t know where you are getting the fact that it’s more dangerous than female mutilation, it’s ridiculous please provide me with a credible source that says otherwise.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
You had no question in the original post?
[–]KiwiPoilu -3 points-2 points-1 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Your comment isn’t accurate toward what I said if you prefer. You can answer to a comment without it being a question by the way
[+]ihackroblox2221 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah, I gotta agree with you. My parents are Christian, so I was circumcised. And to be honest, I don’t really give a shit.
[–]KiwiPoilu -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Thank you ! Gotta love being downvoted for not thinking my parents are monster
[+]yeet20feet -9 points-8 points-7 points (12 children) | Copy Link
i do not agree with this take lol. i would literally hate my parents if they didn’t circumcise me. don’t really get what the issue is
[–]rdomalik 8 points9 points10 points (11 children) | Copy Link
I hate my parents because they did circumcise me. Why would you want less penis and less sensitivity?
Here’s the issue. If you wanted to be circumcised, nobody would stop you. But what about me? I didn’t want this. It was forced on me without my consent. Genital mutilation without consent is a violation of human rights. It’s that simple.
[+]yeet20feet -10 points-9 points-8 points (10 children) | Copy Link
less penis? it’s just foreskin it doesn’t change the length of your dick.
and how the hell would you even know that you lost sensitivity? you don’t even know what ur missing so why care
[–]rdomalik 8 points9 points10 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]yeet20feet -1 points0 points1 point (8 children) | Copy Link
can you show me a study or something that was done to prove this?
[–]rdomalik 3 points4 points5 points (7 children) | Copy Link
Here is a formal study, this one found a 3/10” difference.
The 3/8” figure comes from an informal study by Dr Christopher Fletcher at the University of New Mexico.
[–]yeet20feet 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
thanks
[–]rdomalik 2 points3 points4 points (5 children) | Copy Link
No problem. I know at first glance it’s like “how would it decrease the length?” Theres a couple different factors. For one, if too much skin is removed, the penis kinda gets trapped by the skin and doesn’t have room to grow during puberty. Another reason is that circumcision removes many of the blood vessels so you’re not able to get the proper blood flow which can also stunt growth (as well as the ability to get proper erections, unsurprisingly). Makes sense when you think about it.
[–]yeet20feet -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
i guess i’ve been lucky enough to not have any issues during my time with a circumcised penis. I’d prob end up doing it in my adulthood if my parents didn’t do so it would just seem more scary and i’d worry about the healing process as an adult
[–]rdomalik 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I always tell people, if you’re happy with your circumcised penis, great! I’m really happy for you! All I want for everybody is to be happy and comfortable in their own bodies. If you want to have a circumcised penis I would never stop you from making that choice. That’s your personal preference and that’s fine.
The issue is if you try to force your personal preference onto other people (like your children). As with any cosmetic surgery, the choice can only be made by the owner of the body. Leave that decision up to your son (if you ever have one). You don’t have the right to amputate another person’s body part without their consent. It’s that simple.
Because like you said, you’re lucky to not have complications. If you cut your child, you can hope that he grows up to be happy with your decision. But what if he disagrees? What if he doesn’t want to be circumcised? It’s too late then. This was the case with me, and I’m still working on trying to forgive my parents. I didn’t consent to this, they forced it on me and now I have to live with the complications.
So yeah, I’m happy for you, you got lucky! Just know not to force it onto others because it’s a violation of human rights and medical ethics and your children might not get lucky like you did.
[+]blazedagamer -8 points-7 points-6 points (14 children) | Copy Link
What’s wrong with circumcision? I’m a man, and I’m very happy I was circumcised.
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Does this sound ludicrous to you?
If so, congrats, now you know what you sound like.
And before you go off about "bUt FgM iS So MuCh WoRsE," you should know that of all the women who are victims of FGM, the vast majority have the same opinion of it, as you do of circumcision.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3134892/
[–]blazedagamer -3 points-2 points-1 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I have no fucking idea what you are talking about. At what point did I mention women?
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Read the post again, slowly this time. I'm making an analogy.
[–]craftor708 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Funny how quick they go to BUT I NEVER MENTIONED THAT when trying to point how how the same logic with FGM doesn't work.
Like, lol, we're not changing the subject by making a very comparable analogy.
[–]SonOfHibernia 1 point2 points3 points (9 children) | Copy Link
That’s like saying I love being a vegetarian without ever having tried meat. Sure, you can be perfectly happy, but you don’t really know what you’re missing
[–]craftor708 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Terrible analogy.
How about: "Whats your problem, i was violently sexually assaulted as a baby girl and i'm fine! Whats the problem with sexually assaulting babies?"
[–]EgalitarianGirl777 5 points6 points7 points (7 children) | Copy Link
I think another really good (hypothetical) example is if someone’s parents had a cosmetic procedure done on them right after they were born to change their eye color (just because the parents thought it’d look better), which resulted in them being permanently colorblind. When they grow up they may say that they’re fine and happy it was done since those around them complement their eyes. Sure, they can still see, but they’ll never know what they’re missing and all for the sake of being cosmetically appealing to others.
[–]throwaway_242873 -4 points-3 points-2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
I would never agree to cosmetic surgery on children, even ear piercings without their own desire and interest.
However, I researched it extensively for the birth of my sons, and my sense was that the risk and issues of intact phimosis and UTI outweighed (slightly) the risk and medical issues of medical infant circumcision.
The benefits in ease of cleaning and general underwear comfort put me well over the top of deciding that the best thing for my boys was to start life with one less thing to worry about.
If appendectomies, tonsilectomies, wisdom teeth, or even belly button removal had the same stats and were offered to undertake at the same time I would pay to take care of them all.
(I've had to do half of those as an adult and that was weeks of misery to decide to pull the trigger on super expensive, more miserable surgeries)
... granted the belly button thing is a joke.
... and no, I'm not interested in anyone's poorly researched cherry picked screeds.
Your echo chamber here is dense enough I will no doubt get plenty of flak, but it bears reminding you that medical infant circumcision is an option most folks are glad they had, and we mostly don't value "natural" over convenient, comfortable, and safe.
Hence why we have medicines, houses, and sanitized food and water sources.
[–]burnerphone5 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
UTI's in girls are treated with modern medicine, not brutal mutilation. Circumcision is not a balanced treatment for UTI's, and it actively ignores 3/4 of the tenants of medical ethics.
Infant phimosis is not a thing, boys must learn to retract their foreskin over time, babies naturally have their foreskin partially fused to the glands. Acute phimosis should be treated with stretching and modern medicine, not unnecessary mutilation.
You mutilated your kids, and you might think that you did the right thing, but you removed erogenous tissue from their genitals and they will naturally have less sensitivity down there for the rest of their life. You are lucky your son's did not lose thier genitals or die from infection. FGM makes vaginas easier to clean too, so I hope you respect all the cultures that commit that mutilation as well.
[–]throwaway_242873 -2 points-1 points0 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Foreskin removal is significantly less brutal and mutilatory than appendix and wisdom tooth removal.
I regret immensely having experienced the need for both the latter, despite the heavy use of antibiotics.
Less sensitivity in one of the most commonly OVER sensitive parts of anyone's body isn't a downside in my book, (or for 90% of circumcision owners I suspect).
Reducing the danger to my sons genital and overall health issues is the REASON I had my sons circumcised, and I am very happy to have paid up front in a controller manner, instead of making them face that trouble every year down the road.
If any surgery ACTUALLY made vaginas easier and safer to clean and use for their entire lifetime I would 100% respect the parents who similarly invested in their child's future comfort and happiness.
[–]burnerphone5 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Do you think FGM is good because it can remove the over sensitive clitoris? I seriously have never heard a more stupid argument.
You don't have a moral compass, so I am going to disengage with you. Everyone has a right to bodily autonomy, you are ethically and morally wrong for denying that right to your children.
https://youtu.be/XwZiQyFaAs0
Watch this video to educate yourself on your evil opinion.
[–]The_marmalade_man 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I sincerely hope someone pins you down and cuts off part of your vagina because they believe it's in your best interest.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It would reduce the danger to your sons health if they were taken into care. Your ability to research sucks. I don't know how you even managed to reproduce with your bizarre genital cleanliness OCD. Did it involve large quantities of isopropyl alcohol introduced through a catheter?
[–]old_walnut 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Unfortunately there isnt enough good easily accessible information out there on the other, more important negatives of circumcision. I wish you had access to the whole picture. Watch the documentary American Circumcision... it’s free on amazon.
[–]7Stark -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
I'm amazed by the comments on this post blaming women or religion when in reality it's just the human stupidity and lack of consciousness (ignorance) that has been inherited by some families for generations.
This is the main reason why parental control is important. We've reached the highest level of human evolution, to the point that we shall only evolve further through consciousness. Fathers and Mothers with retarded thoughts will eventually cause the demise of their descendants and family. I wouldn't be surprised if pychological tests and therapy become a pre-requisite to have children in the future.
[–]69_Watermelon_420 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Religions is the reason why most people are circumcised, especially in Islamic countries
[–]7Stark -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, and most of those cases aren't a tragedy to share on Reddit.
[–]craftor708 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
It really isn't stupidity. It is documented maliciousness. Non religious USA circumcisions were pushed by Kellog with the STATED reason of "Reducing sexual pleasure". That's maliciousness, not stupidity or ignorance.
[–]Trashus2 -1 points0 points1 point (15 children) | Copy Link
Im glad i was circumsized. Am I allowed to have that opinion?
[–]craftor708 4 points5 points6 points (14 children) | Copy Link
Yes, you're just not allowed to have the opinion that it's OK to do it to children (who are incapable of consent)
[+]throwaway_242873 -8 points-7 points-6 points (13 children) | Copy Link
You and the anti-vax crowd can SAY we're not allowed to care for our children by giving them preventative medical treatments with their best interest at heart before they can consent...
... but you remain equally fringe, and I'm glad you don't actually control our access to medicine.
[–]craftor708 6 points7 points8 points (7 children) | Copy Link
Vaccines and genital mutilation are not in the same ballpark.
Come back and try again later.
[+]throwaway_242873 -8 points-7 points-6 points (6 children) | Copy Link
So you believe the number of people who believe that vaccines are evil is not in the same ballpark as the number of people who believe that surgical foreskin removal is evil?
Do you hold that belief honestly and soberly, of people who speak primarily the language we are speaking?
[–]craftor708 5 points6 points7 points (4 children) | Copy Link
I do, and if you're questioning this you're not reading much of this thread, or of this sub.
Also, stop trying to twist my words. INFANT genital mutilation is wrong. There are cases you could come up with where it is medically necessary, but they are <1% of circumcisions.
You trying to tie vaccine morons with people upset at being sexually violated as infants shows exactly where you stand.
[–]throwaway_242873 -4 points-3 points-2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I read this whole thread, and I see what I see on many of these... a vocal but tiny minority who believe that foreskin removal is mutilation and sexual violation.
That's absurd to me, because the idea of a penis tip so fragile that rubbing my underwear could be painful is as horrifying to me as apparently the lack of same is to some of you.
When you are used to your penis looking and feeling a certain way it can seem like mutilation for it to be different...
... and INFANT circumcision PREVENTS that from ever needing to happen, as you no longer have a foreskin that could get infected, constricted, cancerous or otherwise NEED to be removed.
[–]craftor708 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Oh, trolling and not interested in accurate information. Got it, moving on.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Remove your brain. You're not using it. Wouldn't want it to get infected.
[–]69_Watermelon_420 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Considering the circumcision rate, at least in the US, is dropping considerably especially with Millenials and Gen Z becoming the vats majority of new parents, I have to disagree that it's a tiny minority
[–]old_walnut 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
So cutting off a healthy and normal body part is ok? Should all women cut off their breasts to reduce risk of breast cancer, at birth?
[–]69_Watermelon_420 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
Are you unironically comparing the mutilation of baby boys to vaccinations?
[–]throwaway_242873 -3 points-2 points-1 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I'm confident that a person who believes infant foreskin removal is evil is MUCH more likely to believe infant vaccination is evil than the rest of us.
In both cases, a parent is making a permanent medical decision for their child for preventative rather than urgent reasons.
Do you honestly and unironically believe the advocates for preventing people from vaccinating or circumcising their children DON'T have similarities?
[–]69_Watermelon_420 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Let us see how crazy of a comparison you are making.
WHO estimates at least 3 million lives are saved every year due to vaccinations.
1% of uncut men get a UTI vs 0.1% of uncut men.
The mortality rate of UTIs are 0.1%.
That means if we mutilate 3.8 billion men, we save a whopping 30k people, and this is not every year. It's within their entire lifetime.
That means we save 413 people from dying every year, so vaccines are several thousands of times better than circumcision.
[–]throwaway_242873 -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
I 100% agree with you that vaccines are many thousands of times more important than circumcision.
One saves huge misery and rampant death, and the other saves almost no deaths (but fairly common low to medium grade misery with urinary and foreskin infections) .
The sober and serious calculus I did was what decision will make my children happiest and healthiest, and I decided on both.
But back to if I am crazy... do you seriously think I am wrong that anti-circumcision adherents are several times more likely to also be anti-vaccine adherents (AND vice versa) than the general population?
Do you NOT see significant overlap in the reasons, goals, and sizes of the two groups?
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Foreskin infections are not common. Where the hell are you putting your dick? I heard of a case of a bloke who got salmonella from fucking raw chicken fillets. Was that you?
[–]OperativeTracer 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
If I ever have a child, than they will not be circumcised.
[+]Isometimeswrite98 -25 points-24 points-23 points (8 children) | Copy Link
Wait what’s the issue with circumcision
[–]Selphia2000[S] 24 points25 points26 points (7 children) | Copy Link
It's often a non-consensual medical process performed in infants with little to no medical reasoning
It's often performed without anaesthesia, leading to the infant being in horrible pain during and after the procedure
It often leads to scarring and other permanent deformation of the penis later in life
It causes permanent loss of sensitivity in the glans, making sex less pleasurable for the man
It does nothing to improve penile hygiene, despite what doctors may claim
Do I need to go on?
It doesn't take more than a quick Google search to understand why circumcision (or MGM) is such an important issue to discuss.
It's genital mutilation. Plain and simple. And it's more wide-spread than you think, even in 'civilised' countries
[+]Isometimeswrite98 -25 points-24 points-23 points (6 children) | Copy Link
Yeah I got it as a baby cause I was born at this Jewish hospital and I really saw no issue with it
[–]thwip62 5 points6 points7 points (5 children) | Copy Link
I bet you did at the time.
[–]Isometimeswrite98 -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
I just came out the womb
[–]thwip62 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
And? That doesn't mean you couldn't feel pain. If anything, it would have been even worse then. You didn't understand why it was happening, all you knew was that someone was hurting you, and it would have hurt for a while after. Without pain relief.
[–]Isometimeswrite98 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Well it just doesn’t seem that major of a thing. Muslims and Jews do it out of religious purposes like as a baby it must’ve hurt like hell but the pain really didn’t linger with me today
[–]thwip62 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Considering it's altering a person's body for no reason without their consent, it should be a much bigger thing.
They do it because they let long-dead people do their thinking for them. To not do it would mean that their ancestors were all wrong, and not enough of these people have the guts to face this.
That shouldn't make a damn bit of difference. Bringing a child into the world and putting him through all that pain for no real reason is immoral. It should be illegal.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
So it would be okay if you were given rohypnol and gang raped by a rugby team. You wouldn't have any lingering memories.
[+]pksings -51 points-50 points-49 points (8 children) | Copy Link
There are multiple reasons why it doesn't. I think the first of which is the overwhelming majority of men circumcised or not really don't care. I'm one of them, this is NOT important. There are so many things that are that deserve attention. Move on, nothing to see here.....
[–]MrLoveless01 28 points29 points30 points (1 child) | Copy Link
I'm happy that it doesn't affect you, but it effects a lot of other men. It effects me.
[–]old_walnut 20 points21 points22 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Oh, it absolutely effects him. it effects ALL of us a great deal. It’s just that most are unaware of it and will carry on with their lives never knowing what was stolen from them. Maybe even while taking boner pills and seeing urologists (who also have no idea about this).
[–]old_walnut 19 points20 points21 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I’m really heartbroken that you don’t understand what was stolen from you- as another circumcised man. You lost 90% of your sexual sensations from your penis, and since you’ve never had it, you’ve never known what you’re missing. Same as me, until I was educated and began restoring my foreskin and gaining my sensitivity back. It’s like seeing in color for the first time.
[–]Selphia2000[S] 17 points18 points19 points (0 children) | Copy Link
If it was medical routine to cut off pieces of newborn girls' bodies, the whole world would be in an uproar, but because it's happening to boys, it doesn't matter?
Congratulations, you're ok with you being circumcised (or, at least you think you are, how can you really know if you are?), but wouldn't you have liked to have had the choice of whether or not to be circumcised?
Not to mention that you are in a minority. It takes little more than a Google search to understand that circumcision, more often than not, is a horrific process with little to no medical justification, and is done primarily on shaky reasoning (eg, "hygiene" or "it makes you better in bed" (none of which has been medically proven in any unbiased research, in fact the opposite has been proven in most cases)). And often has permanent, negative side-effects on the genitalia (scarring, loss of sensitivity etc).
Finally, did you even read the post? If you did, how can you say :
I would very much like to see you say that to the victim in the post. I wonder what they would say to you.
[–]Churwood 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I can see where you’re coming from. Basically how can you miss or care about something you’ve never had? However, the broader discussion is about body autonomy and reclaiming it on the male side of the debate. The child had no say in the matter, it is a procedure that is practiced by even secular members of society only because religion made it the norm and that a natural penis is “weird” or “gross”. There’s no reason why multiple issues cannot be addressed in the wider conversation on men’s rights. Women in the past have argued for some very reasonable issues like voting rights and now have moved onto some of the more minute, although ridiculous. You shouldn’t dismiss smaller issues because they do not matter personally to you. We are stronger when we all fight for rights together even if they do not interest or effect us directly.
[–]fatpieceofshite 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
You're a fucking idiot
[–]LettuceBeGrateful 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Is FGM unimportant in the countries where women overwhelmingly don't feel bothered by what happened to them?
[–]MotherAce -5 points-4 points-3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
it doesn't get talked about often??! You aren't really usually around on this sub, now are you?
[–]craftor708 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Not often enough, its still about 50% of newborn boys in the USA.
[–]MotherAce -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
As someone else said earlier; "it's being talked about relentlessly on this sub."
Not sure why I'm being downvoted for pointing out the same. But since we're on negative karma already; chances are this is very much tied to the US, and how they are nation of slightly retarded people. Culturally accepted male circumcision good evidence for said mental defects.
Here's a clue; there's no God. You guys are chopping off perfectly healthy tissue for no other reason than superstition and ignorance. God damn idiots.
[+]uglyswan1 -11 points-10 points-9 points (15 children) | Copy Link
I don't really care about my circumcision, I had some issues afterwards, but it wasn't too much of a problem. Since the best time to be circumcized is near birth, I don't know how I feel about this issue.
[–]thwip62 4 points5 points6 points (8 children) | Copy Link
That's what they tell people to justify it. It's a lie, a complete fallacy (phallacy?)
[–]uglyswan1 0 points1 point2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
Oh, sorry, that's what I was told
[–]thwip62 3 points4 points5 points (6 children) | Copy Link
Of course you were. If they told you the truth, that in over 90% of cases, it's unnecessary, you'd probably be pissed off, or at least question why they did it. So they have to tell you a load of nonsense about how it's better to do it to a baby than to an adult. This is false because it only works on the assumption that getting cut is an inevitability, so it's best gotten out of the way as soon as possible. Babies have been known to bleed to death when this is done to them, plus it's easier to make mistakes on a baby, too.
[–]craftor708 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Not to mention they can't anesthetize a baby. They use a few numbing drops before cutting, but its basically nothing. MRI's of those babies show they're suffering extreme psychological trauma and only go quiet because they're going into shock.
[–]thwip62 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
And then the grifter in a white coat tells the parents the kid slept through it.
[–]craftor708 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
And then Oprah brags about how nice those foreskins make her face cream. (yeah, they get sold to cosmetic companies, among others)
[–]thwip62 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Disgusting.
[–]uglyswan1 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
That's fair, and I suffered adhesions as a result of a poor job done by my surgeon. I had to get surgery as a result. Maybe I may start siding with you, but I'm not going to spite my parents because of it like others do.
[–]thwip62 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
So did I. Having to get a procedure as a direct result of another procedure that I didn't/don't want, didn't need, and actively hate is ridiculous.
[–]Selphia2000[S] 11 points12 points13 points (5 children) | Copy Link
The best time to be circumcised is never (barring exceptional circumstances)
[+]uglyswan1 -11 points-10 points-9 points (4 children) | Copy Link
Well, it decreases risk of STIs and UTIs, and it makes it easier to clean. I think it also helps prevent phimosis too
[+]noble_fir1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Circumcised men have higher rates of STIs.
European countries where circumcision is rare have the same rate of UTIs as the US.
Phimosis can easily be treated with steroid creams instead of amputating the foreskin.
[–]Selphia2000[S] 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
If you retract the foreskin, you can quite easily clean the penis. As for preventing STIs and UTIs, if you can provide me solid, scientific evidence of that, I'll believe you.
As someone who suffers from phimosis, I can tell you it doesn't prevent it. It is a possible treatment for it, yes, but it is very much the last resort following other treatments.
Even though I could medically benefit from circumcision, I am still anti-circumcision
[+]uglyswan1 -8 points-7 points-6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I was not trying to convince you to be pro circumcision (I doubt you could change anyone's views on this site) only trying to say I don't have enough info to from a solid opinion. I don't really mind mine.
[+]sumtinfunny -7 points-6 points-5 points (14 children) | Copy Link
My boys will have to be circumcised. This is because i had to be myself when i was 25 for a medical reason. Only so they don't have to worry about the possibility of doing it as an adult.
[–]EgalitarianGirl777 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I’m not sure what the medical condition you’re referring to is, though in most cases (even those concerning certain medical conditions) it’s much safer for them to be adults when having that done for a number of reasons (whether medically necessary or if they choose to do it for cosmetic purposes). One reason is because the foreskin doesn’t start developing until around puberty and usually finishes fully developing around 18yr old, which is why when done on infants and children, surgeons have to skin the penis and guess how the foreskin will grow, which runs the risk of taking too little, but usually too much off. This can cause the penis to not grow properly, including it being smaller than it would have been. The skin can also end up being too tight, which can prevent the penis from becoming fully erect or cause severely painful erections for the rest of their life. Additional surgeries may help depending on the severity and other factors, but some have no way of it being fixed with the current technology that we have.
Another reason is that an adult can easily give their explicit consent and be put under anesthesia, while infants can’t and instead have to be awake, restrained and suffer through a severely horrific procedure they were given no choice in, which recent studies have found that it causes permanent brain trauma. Besides that, it’s much easier for an adult to keep the area disinfected properly unlike an infant that has a bag of infection-inducing urine and feces around the wound almost 24/7. In the end, I again have no idea what medical condition it is in your case and what your children could possibly end up having, but unless it’s 100% guaranteed that they’ll be born with it, then the risks outweigh the benefits. After all, cancer runs on both sides of my family, primarily breast cancer and mainly with the women, but there’s no way I would ever had wanted my parents to decide to get my breasts removed because of the possibility I may develop breast cancer.
[–]LettuceBeGrateful 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Breast cancer runs in my family so I'm getting my daughters' breasts removed. So much easier when they're young.
[–]sumtinfunny 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Go for it.
[–]Selphia2000[S] 1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
Is that medical problem hereditary?
[–]sumtinfunny -2 points-1 points0 points (4 children) | Copy Link
Possibly, it was a rare form of precancer.
[–]Selphia2000[S] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I'm not a medical expert, but based off of the current research, I would say that this is one of the few possibly legitimate reasons to circumcise a child. Go with the advice of the real medical experts, but make sure to explain to your children when they're older why you decided to circumcise them.
For anyone interested, there is current research being done in the possibility of using circumcision as a preventative measure against HPV and penile cancers. However, it is a debated issue with strong evidence for both arguments. I would urge people to do their own research before jumping to any conclusions
[–]sumtinfunny -3 points-2 points-1 points (2 children) | Copy Link
My doctor told me that it was the best option. Either lose a little or risk losing the whole thing.
[–]Selphia2000[S] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
It's not an easy decision to make, I'm sure your children will understand
[–]sumtinfunny -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Oh for sure when i tell them the story my last line will be "you're welcome" lol
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
Are you fucking serious.
[–]sumtinfunny -2 points-1 points0 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Yes i am fucking serious
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
For one of the rarest forms of cancer in the world? That can be treated, as you've experience, when you're an adult?
No, you are not fucking serious. You are deluding yourself.
[–]sumtinfunny -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Look clearly you are an expert in foreskin congratulations on your PhD. But let me make this clear. The act of being circumcised as an adult sucks ass, one that i had to endure. Not you. I want to prevent my children from the possibility of having to go through what i had to go through. If you have been circumcised as an adult I'm sure you can understand. But please tell me, if you were circumcised as an infant, how bad did it hurt? Do you still remember it? Does it make you less of a man? No it does not. Now please have a pleasant day.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Let me put it this way.
Women have, in their lives, about a 1/8 (13%) chance of developing breast cancer. Breast cancer is the 2nd leading cause of death for women.
I'm sure all the women who have had to suffer to suffer mastectomy to treat it would tell it really sucks.
But you wouldn't think to preemptively remove your daughter's breasts when she's a child, in the 13% chance she develops cancer in them and 2.6% chance she dies from it *sometime* later in life, would you?
Now, for men, lifetime chance of developing penile cancer is anywhere from 1/50,000 (0.0002%) to 1/12,000,000 (a number so small I'm not going to type it, and this gap in the probability is so huge exactly because it's so vanishingly rare it's difficult for researchers to calculate), and of that tiny number, the 5 year survival rate is 85%, and not all of those require circumcisions to treat.
Is this making any sense to you?
[–]the_crx -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
What do you mean? It gets talked about all the time.
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (35 children) | Copy Link
Should I circumsise my son ?
[–]Selphia2000[S] 1 point2 points3 points (34 children) | Copy Link
Unless there is a legitimate medical reason to do so (HPV, penile cancer etc. Hygiene is a not a legitimate reason, it is perfectly possible to clean one's penis while having a foreskin), you should not circumcise your child.
Circumcision can lead to various medical problems later in life such as scarring, lesions, loss of sensitivity etc. Check out r/intactivism for more info on this subject
[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points (33 children) | Copy Link
But I was circumsised too and I’m fine so what’s wrong if I circumsise him?
[–]Selphia2000[S] 2 points3 points4 points (24 children) | Copy Link
Question, why were you circumcised? Why did your parents decide to cut off a piece of you without your permission
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points (23 children) | Copy Link
Because my father was that’s why they did it for me
[–]Selphia2000[S] 3 points4 points5 points (22 children) | Copy Link
That's a really solid, compelling reason right there.
Forget science, forget logic, family tradition is all that matters.
Maybe do some research and figure out for yourself if it's worth potentially permanently mutilating your child and risking ruing part of their body for no other reason than family traditions
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points (21 children) | Copy Link
I’m very traditional with family
[–]Selphia2000[S] 4 points5 points6 points (18 children) | Copy Link
And that's worth mutilating your child for?
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (17 children) | Copy Link
I mean to each their own right ?
[–]Selphia2000[S] 3 points4 points5 points (13 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, but not when it harms other people, especially children
How hard is that to understand?
[–]craftor708 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Tell that to child rapists.
[–]69_Watermelon_420 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Then, don't use the internet, don't eat processed foods, can't use anything made because of the industrial revolution, hell agriculture is a no go then.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I said with >family<
[–]burnerphone5 3 points4 points5 points (7 children) | Copy Link
The risks (death, loss of genitalia, loss of sensitivity) do not out weight the benefits (takes 0.5 seconds less to clean in the shower).
Let your child remain intact as evolution intended. Have you ever wondered why nobody circumcised pets or farm animals "to prevent infection".
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points (6 children) | Copy Link
But let’s say it happened he got cut, then what?
[–]burnerphone5 3 points4 points5 points (5 children) | Copy Link
He might never care about it. He might love it and call intact people anteater dicks. He might hate it and try to get it reversed. It might get botched and he could die or lose more of his penis than his foreskin.
But the one thing that is constant is that his penis will always be less sensitive (less nerves) and less functional (more lubrication required for intercourse).
I suggest you watch this video:
https://youtu.be/XwZiQyFaAs0
It should give you a VERY complete image of the reasons for and against the practice.
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points (4 children) | Copy Link
That’s anecdotal. Most my friends are cut and they can have intercourse with no problem. And he’s not gonna die
[–]burnerphone5 3 points4 points5 points (3 children) | Copy Link
You can't remove nerves then claim no loss in sensitivity. It is literally biologically impossible. Watch the video please. There is absolutely a chance he will die.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-47292307
That could be your son in the future you mutilating brute.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
If you have “full” sensitivity and one day you lose it, then that’s (in your head) a loss of sensitivity. But if you never “had” much of it to begin with, how can you feel the loss? Either way, I feel plenty of pleasure during intercourse, anymore would just be too much and I’m cut.
[–]burnerphone5 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
That is frankly a very stupid and elementary argument. I get that your penis still works, but it is a matter of fact that it doesn't work as well. Do you need lotion to jerk off like many cut men? That's a very clear example of how the function of your penis was damaged. It's like if you were born colorblind so you want to surgically make your son the same way because of tradition, it makes no logical or moral sense.
I know you can't see my perspective well since you were cut, but if you spend the time to watch that video you would be able to make a much more informed decision for your son.