Comments on: On Momversation: Circumcision? http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/ parents don't know what they are doing anyway, might as well laugh about it Mon, 21 May 2012 19:40:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: edouard http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-99517 edouard Sat, 07 Apr 2012 00:40:03 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-99517 Tim: When it comes to evaluating the merits and demerits of circumcision, an ounce of common sense is worth a metric ton of medical "evidence." I am an academic, and can assure you that "peer review" is NOT tantamount to "truth." The foreskin and frenulum are the most sexual parts of the male body, by virtue of their location and ennervation. This sexual property is the essence of their function. The WHO's recommendation was limited to eastern and southern Africa, where HIV is rampant. That recommendation is grounded in clinical trials that were conducted in a manner I deem a scientific scandal. When it comes to human sexuality, doctors are indeed often ignorant. For starters, not a single USA medical school includes a course on human sexuality. Only two western societies routinely circumcise a large fraction of every age cohort for supposed prophylactic reasons: South Korea (which does it middle and high school age) and the USA. For me, that speaks much more loudly than the WHO or dubious and tendentious articles in American medical journals. If the natural penis is unhealthy, the European and Japanese experience would prove very revealing. Tim:

When it comes to evaluating the merits and demerits of circumcision, an ounce of common sense is worth a metric ton of medical “evidence.” I am an academic, and can assure you that “peer review” is NOT tantamount to “truth.”

The foreskin and frenulum are the most sexual parts of the male body, by virtue of their location and ennervation. This sexual property is the essence of their function.

The WHO’s recommendation was limited to eastern and southern Africa, where HIV is rampant. That recommendation is grounded in clinical trials that were conducted in a manner I deem a scientific scandal.

When it comes to human sexuality, doctors are indeed often ignorant. For starters, not a single USA medical school includes a course on human sexuality.

Only two western societies routinely circumcise a large fraction of every age cohort for supposed prophylactic reasons: South Korea (which does it middle and high school age) and the USA. For me, that speaks much more loudly than the WHO or dubious and tendentious articles in American medical journals. If the natural penis is unhealthy, the European and Japanese experience would prove very revealing.

]]> By: edouard http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-99514 edouard Sat, 07 Apr 2012 00:29:08 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-99514 Upset Son: Mothers make the decision because 120 years ago, circumcision became a part of hospital birth for families that were financially comfortable. The creation of Medicaid in the 1960s made hospital birth with male circumcision well nigh universal. Because anesthesia was more dangerous back in the day, the protocol became to cut boys when they were too young to resist or remember. Doing it without anesthesia has become so deeply ingrained that a majority of American doctors still do not inject lidocaine before circumcising a newborn. "I wish I could have made the decision for myself, it's my penis not my parents'." The intactivist argument in one sentence! "You are the first person who just goes out and says it isn't right, and shouldn't be taken lightly." Rosemary Romberg made this argument in a magazine article published in 1978. Many other lay people have since walked in her footsteps. "I don't know if he ever considered that his son might grow up not to be Jewish." Many secular and Reform fathers married to gentiles consider their children to be Jews. "I am not in a position to talk to him about it." My father died when I was 40. We had NEVER talked about circumcision. "... if you read your history, one of the uses of circumcision was to lessen sexual pleasure and discourage masturbation. To make men less promiscuous..." Such was indeed the beliefs in those benighted days... "...and to insure that women did not have orgasms." You are mistaken here. It was universally believed before the 1990s, that circumcision had no effect on women's satisfaction from intercourse, because the foreskin vanishes when the foreskin becomes erect. We know better now, in good part because experienced women are willing to blog their sex lives.. "My foreskin was completely removed, the whole thing. I've learned recently that it isn't necessary even within Judaism to remove it all. Why my parents did this to me, I don't know." You were cut along with about 100 million American and Canadian baby boys born last century. The vast majority of these boys were not Jewish at all. In the American mind, especially in the middle and upper classes, the glans of the penis was expected to be fully visible 24/7. The natural penis was seen as bizarre and disgusting. "Maybe I'll talk to them about it after I've grown out of just being insecure about it." If your parents are completely unaware of the rise of intactivism in USA parenting, this conversation could prove very difficult and defensive. I agree that to condemn all alteration of the female genitalia, while endorsing routine circumcision, is an ethical fail. Upset Son:

Mothers make the decision because 120 years ago, circumcision became a part of hospital birth for families that were financially comfortable. The creation of Medicaid in the 1960s made hospital birth with male circumcision well nigh universal. Because anesthesia was more dangerous back in the day, the protocol became to cut boys when they were too young to resist or remember. Doing it without anesthesia has become so deeply ingrained that a majority of American doctors still do not inject lidocaine before circumcising a newborn.

“I wish I could have made the decision for myself, it’s my penis not my parents’.”
The intactivist argument in one sentence!

“You are the first person who just goes out and says it isn’t right, and shouldn’t be taken lightly.”
Rosemary Romberg made this argument in a magazine article published in 1978. Many other lay people have since walked in her footsteps.

“I don’t know if he ever considered that his son might grow up not to be Jewish.”
Many secular and Reform fathers married to gentiles consider their children to be Jews.

“I am not in a position to talk to him about it.”
My father died when I was 40. We had NEVER talked about circumcision.

“… if you read your history, one of the uses of circumcision was to lessen sexual pleasure and discourage masturbation. To make men less promiscuous…”
Such was indeed the beliefs in those benighted days…

“…and to insure that women did not have orgasms.”
You are mistaken here. It was universally believed before the 1990s, that circumcision had no effect on women’s satisfaction from intercourse, because the foreskin vanishes when the foreskin becomes erect. We know better now, in good part because experienced women are willing to blog their sex lives..

“My foreskin was completely removed, the whole thing. I’ve learned recently that it isn’t necessary even within Judaism to remove it all. Why my parents did this to me, I don’t know.”
You were cut along with about 100 million American and Canadian baby boys born last century. The vast majority of these boys were not Jewish at all. In the American mind, especially in the middle and upper classes, the glans of the penis was expected to be fully visible 24/7. The natural penis was seen as bizarre and disgusting.

“Maybe I’ll talk to them about it after I’ve grown out of just being insecure about it.”
If your parents are completely unaware of the rise of intactivism in USA parenting, this conversation could prove very difficult and defensive.

I agree that to condemn all alteration of the female genitalia, while endorsing routine circumcision, is an ethical fail.

]]> By: Upset Son http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-99278 Upset Son Fri, 06 Apr 2012 04:23:31 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-99278 Why are mothers the ones making this decision? I love my mother as much as anyone, but as a teenage boy if I could have one wish it would be for my foreskin back. I know my parents only had my best interests in mind but it still affects me. I wish I could have made the decision for myself, it's my penis not my parents'. Thank you Daphne, I have done extensive research on this subject in an attempt to reach some closure. You are the first person who just goes out and says it isn't right, and shouldn't be taken lightly. Alice, I appreciate that you took the time to at least think about it. My father also had a Jewish background. Of course after he married a christian girl he was less involved in family affairs. I don't know if he ever considered that his son might grow up not to be Jewish. I am not in a position to talk to him about it. I don't understand why it is the parents making the decision at birth, if a urinary tract infection rises then maybe it is necessary. If it isn't why not let the boy make the decision when he is old enough? Also Alice, I hate to break it too you but if you read your history, one of the uses of circumcision was to lessen sexual pleasure and discourage masturbation. To make men less promiscuous, and to insure that women did not have orgasms. While this is known to be less true today, it is no less genital mutilation then the removal of the clitoris. While the technical tissue equivalent is the removal of the entire glans, is it any less rape if he only puts it in half way? My foreskin was completely removed, the whole thing. I've learned recently that it isn't necessary even within Judaism to remove it all. Why my parents did this to me, I don't know. Maybe I'll talk to them about it after I've grown out of just being insecure about it. Why are mothers the ones making this decision? I love my mother as much as anyone, but as a teenage boy if I could have one wish it would be for my foreskin back. I know my parents only had my best interests in mind but it still affects me. I wish I could have made the decision for myself, it’s my penis not my parents’. Thank you Daphne, I have done extensive research on this subject in an attempt to reach some closure. You are the first person who just goes out and says it isn’t right, and shouldn’t be taken lightly. Alice, I appreciate that you took the time to at least think about it. My father also had a Jewish background. Of course after he married a christian girl he was less involved in family affairs. I don’t know if he ever considered that his son might grow up not to be Jewish. I am not in a position to talk to him about it. I don’t understand why it is the parents making the decision at birth, if a urinary tract infection rises then maybe it is necessary. If it isn’t why not let the boy make the decision when he is old enough? Also Alice, I hate to break it too you but if you read your history, one of the uses of circumcision was to lessen sexual pleasure and discourage masturbation. To make men less promiscuous, and to insure that women did not have orgasms. While this is known to be less true today, it is no less genital mutilation then the removal of the clitoris. While the technical tissue equivalent is the removal of the entire glans, is it any less rape if he only puts it in half way? My foreskin was completely removed, the whole thing. I’ve learned recently that it isn’t necessary even within Judaism to remove it all. Why my parents did this to me, I don’t know. Maybe I’ll talk to them about it after I’ve grown out of just being insecure about it.

]]> By: facebook.com/iphone.iphone http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-13542 facebook.com/iphone.iphone Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:04:09 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-13542 18 dispelling myths about circumcision: http://pharmtips.com/2008/11/27/dispelling-myths-about-circumcision/ You simply CAN'T read this and STILL circumcision is a "good" idea. If you do, you have SERIOUS issues! Also check out: http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/ 10 Ways CIRCUMCISED Male Sex Hurts Women! It's a lose-lose situation. 18 dispelling myths about circumcision:

http://pharmtips.com/2008/11/27/dispelling-myths-about-circumcision/

You simply CAN’T read this and STILL circumcision is a “good” idea. If you do, you have SERIOUS issues!

Also check out:

http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/

10 Ways CIRCUMCISED Male Sex Hurts Women!

It’s a lose-lose situation.

]]> By: edouard http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-4832 edouard Thu, 02 Apr 2009 00:59:40 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-4832 What circumcision removes has a function, simply because it is rich in nerve endings. The foreskin and frenulum are central players in the male machinery for receiving sexual pleasure, and these may also 3be important for giving pleasure. Speaking from long experience, the foreskin certainly makes masturbation and manual foreplay easier and more pleasant. There is no real American medical consensus on the merits of routine infant circumcision. In other medically advanced countries, there is a consensus: against. The recent African clinical trials tell us nothing about whether it is a good thing to routinely circumcise a baby born in an advanced economy. In an African village, there are no toilets, no clean water, no showers, no bidets. There are bizarre sexual beliefs and practices. They do not see marriage as requiring fidelity. The village store does not stock condoms. If it does, few people buy them. Finally, the clinical trials were not run long enough to address the possibility that circ only delays infection. It is a bald fact that there are fewer STDs in intact Europe and Japan than in the cut USA. The pain of American routine infant circumcision is completely unnecessary: inject lidocaine into the penis and wait 10 minutes before cutting. To circumcise without lidocaine should be grounds for a lawsuit. But if the doctor absolutely refuses to use lidocaine, that is a good reason not to cut. The vast majority of Americans who are circumcised were not done because their parents evaluated the "evidence" in good faith. Before Wiswell began reporting his data dredging on circ and UTI, there was not a shred of valid evidence in the literature supporting routine infant circumcision. This is the conclusion of the first intactivist book, Wallerstein (1980). Americans are a circumcised people for historical and sociological reasons, starting with "never underestimate barefaced conformity as a driver behind human choices." There are two scholarly books on the history and sociology of routine circumcision among the English speaking peoples, by Gollaher and Robert Darby. I doubt that those books are the last word. But I will say this: circ definitely appealed to several generations of upper middle class mothers and the doctors they consulted. Thus circ quickly became a permanent mark of better origins. Parents cut their kids to make them look more upscale, more sophisticated. Also, never underestimate the squeamishness and prudishness of American parents. A hygienically sophisticated mother has to pay some attention to her son's foreskin, find out when it can retract and then teach her boy to wash under it. I can assure you that many USA mothers in the last century did not like having to think about Junior's penis. Marriage manuals and childrearing books 40-60 years ago said little more about circumcision than that it prevented the accumulation of smegma, and smegma was just soooo gross, you know? That you can skin it back in the shower and wash away the smegma in 3 seconds was never mentioned. Published scientific research is never final, and less decisive than some posters seem to think, especially on a subjects with a strong sexual and sociological context. One will never understand American RIC if one insists on thinking about only as a urological or STD prevention measure to be justified or not by clinical trials. Is Wikipedia a bad source on this and other topics? It's not perfect, but it's often better than a lot of the typeset material I read. What circumcision removes has a function, simply because it is rich in nerve endings. The foreskin and frenulum are central players in the male machinery for receiving sexual pleasure, and these may also 3be important for giving pleasure. Speaking from long experience, the foreskin certainly makes masturbation and manual foreplay easier and more pleasant.

There is no real American medical consensus on the merits of routine infant circumcision. In other medically advanced countries, there is a consensus: against.

The recent African clinical trials tell us nothing about whether it is a good thing to routinely circumcise a baby born in an advanced economy. In an African village, there are no toilets, no clean water, no showers, no bidets. There are bizarre sexual beliefs and practices. They do not see marriage as requiring fidelity. The village store does not stock condoms. If it does, few people buy them. Finally, the clinical trials were not run long enough to address the possibility that circ only delays infection. It is a bald fact that there are fewer STDs in intact Europe and Japan than in the cut USA.

The pain of American routine infant circumcision is completely unnecessary: inject lidocaine into the penis and wait 10 minutes before cutting. To circumcise without lidocaine should be grounds for a lawsuit. But if the doctor absolutely refuses to use lidocaine, that is a good reason not to cut.

The vast majority of Americans who are circumcised were not done because their parents evaluated the “evidence” in good faith. Before Wiswell began reporting his data dredging on circ and UTI, there was not a shred of valid evidence in the literature supporting routine infant circumcision. This is the conclusion of the first intactivist book, Wallerstein (1980).

Americans are a circumcised people for historical and sociological reasons, starting with “never underestimate barefaced conformity as a driver behind human choices.”
There are two scholarly books on the history and sociology of routine circumcision among the English speaking peoples, by Gollaher and Robert Darby. I doubt that those books are the last word. But I will say this: circ definitely appealed to several generations of upper middle class mothers and the doctors they consulted. Thus circ quickly became a permanent mark of better origins. Parents cut their kids to make them look more upscale, more sophisticated.

Also, never underestimate the squeamishness and prudishness of American parents. A hygienically sophisticated mother has to pay some attention to her son’s foreskin, find out when it can retract and then teach her boy to wash under it. I can assure you that many USA mothers in the last century did not like having to think about Junior’s penis.

Marriage manuals and childrearing books 40-60 years ago said little more about circumcision than that it prevented the accumulation of smegma, and smegma was just soooo gross, you know? That you can skin it back in the shower and wash away the smegma in 3 seconds was never mentioned.

Published scientific research is never final, and less decisive than some posters seem to think, especially on a subjects with a strong sexual and sociological context. One will never understand American RIC if one insists on thinking about only as a urological or STD prevention measure to be justified or not by clinical trials.

Is Wikipedia a bad source on this and other topics? It’s not perfect, but it’s often better than a lot of the typeset material I read.

]]> By: latinamomof3 http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-4263 latinamomof3 Sat, 07 Mar 2009 03:52:33 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-4263 Cindy, your last comment proves that you did not watch the video I posted for you to watch. It talks about what you just said in your last comment. You've 'heard' but that is not the fact! Please watch the video where PROFESSIONALS talk about this issue. The little benefits and harm cancel each other out, so basically circumcision IS a cosmetic surgery. NOT needed. It is unethical to perform cosmetic surgery in our children to meet the parent's standards. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5395565256830319025 Cindy, your last comment proves that you did not watch the video I posted for you to watch. It talks about what you just said in your last comment. You’ve ‘heard’ but that is not the fact! Please watch the video where PROFESSIONALS talk about this issue. The little benefits and harm cancel each other out, so basically circumcision IS a cosmetic surgery. NOT needed. It is unethical to perform cosmetic surgery in our children to meet the parent’s standards.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5395565256830319025

]]> By: Cindy http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-4262 Cindy Sat, 07 Mar 2009 03:18:56 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-4262 In reading my comment it did sound bad to indicate the preference of my sons penis. But there seem to be more Pros than Cons to having a circumcision done that I'm just not against it. I honestly can't see how this can affect someone when done at birth. I've heard many times that its believed that infants have "poorly developed" neurologic systems. They can't feel pain and if they did feel the pain, they would not remember it. Why would they feel violated if they haven't even lived to know the difference. I can't comprehend how circumcision could have a lasting effect on a child. In reading my comment it did sound bad to indicate the preference of my sons penis. But there seem to be more Pros than Cons to having a circumcision done that I’m just not against it. I honestly can’t see how this can affect someone when done at birth. I’ve heard many times that its believed that infants have “poorly developed” neurologic systems. They can’t feel pain and if they did feel the pain, they would not remember it. Why would they feel violated if they haven’t even lived to know the difference. I can’t comprehend how circumcision could have a lasting effect on a child.

]]> By: Fevrin http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-4248 Fevrin Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:47:03 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-4248 I'm very confused, Cindy, why you're still enamored with the thought of cutting off the most sensitive/pleasurable part of boys' penises when you've seen first-hand that even a temporary period where the child doesn't take care to be perfectly clean is not harmful during the development of boys (and girls). In addition, infections are probably not the most common ailments of a circumcised penis; since the procedure was done at birth, you won't know until they're older what the true affects of it are. What may have been a small defect of the procedure at birth will grow as the child grows, and these may not show up until the teen years. Complications such as tight penile shafts, potentially causing painful erections; skin bridges, which ironically may be difficult to clean under; unsightly scars and skin tags, among others. Even if there turn out to be seemingly *no* defects, the children were still violated of their right to bodily integrity...and all *just* to look like their father? If a child truly is distraught as a result of having a different-looking penis from his father (or brothers or friends), it's called counseling; not medically-unnecessary surgery. Seriously, do you think girls should be circumcised if their moms were? I’m very confused, Cindy, why you’re still enamored with the thought of cutting off the most sensitive/pleasurable part of boys’ penises when you’ve seen first-hand that even a temporary period where the child doesn’t take care to be perfectly clean is not harmful during the development of boys (and girls). In addition, infections are probably not the most common ailments of a circumcised penis; since the procedure was done at birth, you won’t know until they’re older what the true affects of it are. What may have been a small defect of the procedure at birth will grow as the child grows, and these may not show up until the teen years. Complications such as tight penile shafts, potentially causing painful erections; skin bridges, which ironically may be difficult to clean under; unsightly scars and skin tags, among others.

Even if there turn out to be seemingly *no* defects, the children were still violated of their right to bodily integrity…and all *just* to look like their father? If a child truly is distraught as a result of having a different-looking penis from his father (or brothers or friends), it’s called counseling; not medically-unnecessary surgery. Seriously, do you think girls should be circumcised if their moms were?

]]> By: latinamomof3 http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-4240 latinamomof3 Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:13:18 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-4240 Cindy with all due respect, I think that your personal preference should not be reflected in your son's penis. What would you do when girls leave pee spots in their underwear? should I cut off their genitals too? Cutting the foreskin off is cutting 20,000 nerve endings that are vital for natural sexual function. It might be nicer to you but in countries that do not circumcise, having a child with his head exposed 24/7 is somewhat disturbing as the head is only exposed when erect in adults. Do you really think your intact boy wants to have the most sensitive part of his penis cut off? I really hope your circumcised boy doesn't have access to the internet and the valuable information that it's out there about circumcision and its harm. It's NOT the parent's decision - but the CHILD's! Who's penis is? The only decision the parent needs to make is to do NOTHING to someone else's body. HIS body, HIS decision. Video regarding circumcision featuring Dr Dean Edell http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5395565256830319025 Cindy with all due respect, I think that your personal preference should not be reflected in your son’s penis. What would you do when girls leave pee spots in their underwear? should I cut off their genitals too? Cutting the foreskin off is cutting 20,000 nerve endings that are vital for natural sexual function. It might be nicer to you but in countries that do not circumcise, having a child with his head exposed 24/7 is somewhat disturbing as the head is only exposed when erect in adults. Do you really think your intact boy wants to have the most sensitive part of his penis cut off? I really hope your circumcised boy doesn’t have access to the internet and the valuable information that it’s out there about circumcision and its harm.

It’s NOT the parent’s decision – but the CHILD’s! Who’s penis is? The only decision the parent needs to make is to do NOTHING to someone else’s body. HIS body, HIS decision.

Video regarding circumcision featuring Dr Dean Edell
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5395565256830319025

]]> By: Cindy http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-4239 Cindy Fri, 06 Mar 2009 07:54:55 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-4239 Well my 13 yr old is not circumcised. His father was circumcised but didn't have a preference for our son and I didn't find it necessary, so it wasn't done. I'm no longer with his father. I'm currently married and have a 9 yr old and 16 month old from my current husband of 10 yrs. My husband is circumcised and wanted his boys to be circumsised. There was no argument from me because I didn't feel it was wrong. I said 'OK'. Having 1 not circumcised and 2 that are circumcised I will say that I prefer circumcision. My 9 year old is much cleaner(no odor and no pee spots in the underwear) than the 13 year old while he was younger and not having to deal with pulling the skin back to make sure it is clean. I still do my 13 year olds laundry and he now takes very good care of himself so that is not an issue any more but I personally think it looks nicer circumcised. Also neither of my boys have ever had infections or complications of any sort. My oldest did question why does he look different from his brother and I explained why. I have asked him if he would like to be circumcised. His answer is always no and I'm sure that will never change. I don't want him to feel different and tell him that he is pretty lucky because he is able to make the decision for himself if he chooses to. I also want to add that I have a cousin who had circumcised her son when he was 10 which was a few years ago and to my amazement he says he likes it but I don't know if he is being honest. I felt really bad knowing how old he was and the pain he had gone through. He had a this extra skin for so many years and to have it suddenly removed I think is mind boggling. I will add future comments regarding his feelings toward being circumcised so late in age. I'm really interested to know myself as he gets older. This is a very touchy subject but babies get over the pain very quickly. I mean when my little ones returned to my room after their circumcisions they were sound asleep. This is ultimately a decision made by the parents and I don't think it is a bad decision. Daphne I'm glad you brought this up. I don't think you were disrespectful and I was really interested on what people had to say on this topic. Well my 13 yr old is not circumcised. His father was circumcised but didn’t have a preference for our son and I didn’t find it necessary, so it wasn’t done. I’m no longer with his father. I’m currently married and have a 9 yr old and 16 month old from my current husband of 10 yrs. My husband is circumcised and wanted his boys to be circumsised. There was no argument from me because I didn’t feel it was wrong. I said ‘OK’.

Having 1 not circumcised and 2 that are circumcised I will say that I prefer circumcision. My 9 year old is much cleaner(no odor and no pee spots in the underwear) than the 13 year old while he was younger and not having to deal with pulling the skin back to make sure it is clean. I still do my 13 year olds laundry and he now takes very good care of himself so that is not an issue any more but I personally think it looks nicer circumcised. Also neither of my boys have ever had infections or complications of any sort.

My oldest did question why does he look different from his brother and I explained why. I have asked him if he would like to be circumcised. His answer is always no and I’m sure that will never change. I don’t want him to feel different and tell him that he is pretty lucky because he is able to make the decision for himself if he chooses to.

I also want to add that I have a cousin who had circumcised her son when he was 10 which was a few years ago and to my amazement he says he likes it but I don’t know if he is being honest. I felt really bad knowing how old he was and the pain he had gone through. He had a this extra skin for so many years and to have it suddenly removed I think is mind boggling. I will add future comments regarding his feelings toward being circumcised so late in age. I’m really interested to know myself as he gets older.

This is a very touchy subject but babies get over the pain very quickly. I mean when my little ones returned to my room after their circumcisions they were sound asleep.

This is ultimately a decision made by the parents and I don’t think it is a bad decision.

Daphne I’m glad you brought this up. I don’t think you were disrespectful and I was really interested on what people had to say on this topic.

]]> By: Carita http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-4077 Carita Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:58:01 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-4077 It was nice and sort of a relief to see a non-Kumbaya moment. Forums like these wouldn't be necessary if we all agreed on everything. It was surprisingly refreshing (as well as uncomfortable- yikes!) to see such strong views voiced between the moms. All I could think was, "Thank God I have a daughter!" I remember the anxiety about what to do in regard to circumcision had I given birth to a boy. This topic was a perfect example of how some decisions (even at times the most fundamental) vary from family to family/ mother to mother and how all any of us can really do is make the best decisions possible based on the information we have. This is what Momversation is all about! No matter what our choices, in the end, the kids will decide for themselves how deeply we've ruined them. :) It was nice and sort of a relief to see a non-Kumbaya moment. Forums like these wouldn’t be necessary if we all agreed on everything. It was surprisingly refreshing (as well as uncomfortable- yikes!) to see such strong views voiced between the moms. All I could think was, “Thank God I have a daughter!” I remember the anxiety about what to do in regard to circumcision had I given birth to a boy.

This topic was a perfect example of how some decisions (even at times the most fundamental) vary from family to family/ mother to mother and how all any of us can really do is make the best decisions possible based on the information we have. This is what Momversation is all about! No matter what our choices, in the end, the kids will decide for themselves how deeply we’ve ruined them. :)

]]> By: Fevrin http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-4045 Fevrin Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:19:51 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-4045 Sexual behavior is a far greater factor in gauging one's risk of contracting an STD than circumcision. One who always practices safer sex will most likely have a very insignificant risk level, while one who doesn't will raise their risk level. Condoms are known to provide protection against STDs, and they are both cheap on the body and in the wallet, so unless there's a clear, compelling, and immediate medical reason to do so, circumcision on a non-consenting patient is malpractice, just as it is with any other procedure. Sexual behavior is a far greater factor in gauging one’s risk of contracting an STD than circumcision. One who always practices safer sex will most likely have a very insignificant risk level, while one who doesn’t will raise their risk level. Condoms are known to provide protection against STDs, and they are both cheap on the body and in the wallet, so unless there’s a clear, compelling, and immediate medical reason to do so, circumcision on a non-consenting patient is malpractice, just as it is with any other procedure.

]]> By: Gratefulman http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-4013 Gratefulman Wed, 25 Feb 2009 02:16:36 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-4013 I have read perhaps half of the comments here. I will finish reading later. Just before the middle of the last century, I was circumcised eight days after birth. My parents found it a non-event with no complications. Twenty-one years ago I began working to improve my ability to relate to others. One of the big issues that I found was my circumcision. I believe that trauma contributed to post-traumatic stress disorder that complicated my life. But the circumcising knife had two edges. Finding within me unresolved tension of such impact as to dissociate a week-old brain has added to my understanding of human reality. To also find the wisdom and time and energy to actually heal this personality has been a religious experience. Those are both gains. I may also have gained some knowledge to pass on to doubters: Circumcise only with compelling reasons. I have mainly lost time and people. My acquaintances have been uncomfortable relating to my confusion and denial. I have read perhaps half of the comments here. I will finish reading later.

Just before the middle of the last century, I was circumcised eight days after birth. My parents found it a non-event with no complications.

Twenty-one years ago I began working to improve my ability to relate to others. One of the big issues that I found was my circumcision. I believe that trauma contributed to post-traumatic stress disorder that complicated my life.

But the circumcising knife had two edges. Finding within me unresolved tension of such impact as to dissociate a week-old brain has added to my understanding of human reality. To also find the wisdom and time and energy to actually heal this personality has been a religious experience. Those are both gains. I may also have gained some knowledge to pass on to doubters: Circumcise only with compelling reasons.

I have mainly lost time and people. My acquaintances have been uncomfortable relating to my confusion and denial.

]]> By: Mark Lyndon http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-3835 Mark Lyndon Tue, 17 Feb 2009 16:39:23 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-3835 You might also want to check out the following. It looks like I can't post links, but you can find all these quotes on the organizations' official websites: Canadian Paediatric Society "Recommendation: Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed." "Circumcision is a 'non-therapeutic' procedure, which means it is not medically necessary." "After reviewing the scientific evidence for and against circumcision, the CPS does not recommend routine circumcision for newborn boys. Many paediatricians no longer perform circumcisions." Royal Australasian College of Physicians "After extensive review of the literature the Royal Australasian College of Physicians reaffirms that there is no medical indication for routine neonatal circumcision." (those last nine words are in bold on their website, and almost all the men responsible for this statement will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. "Routine" circumcision is now *banned* in public hospitals in Australia in all states except one.) British Medical Association "to circumcise for therapeutic reasons where medical research has shown other techniques to be at least as effective and less invasive would be unethical and inappropriate." National Health Service (UK) "Many people have strong views about whether circumcision should be carried out or not. It is not routinely performed in the UK because there is no clear clinical evidence to suggest it has any medical benefit." Canadian Children's Rights Council "It is the position of the Canadian Children's Rights Council that 'circumcision' of male or female children is genital mutilation of children." drops in male circumcision: USA: from 90% to 57% Canada: from 47% to 14% UK: from 35% to about 5% (less than 1% among non-Muslims) Australia: 90% to 12.6% ("routine" circumcision has recently been *banned* in public hospitals in all states except one, so the rate will now be a lot lower) New Zealand: 95% to below 3% (mostly Samoans and Tongans) South America and Europe: never above 5% It's worth remembering that we wouldn't even be having this discussion if it weren't for the fact that 19th century doctors thought that : a) masturbation caused various physical and mental problems (including epilepsy, convulsions, paralysis, tuberculosis etc), and b) circumcision stopped masturbation. Both of those sound ridiculous today I know, but if you don't believe me, then google this: "A Short History of Circumcision in North America: In the Physicians' Own Words". You might also want to check out the following. It looks like I can’t post links, but you can find all these quotes on the organizations’ official websites:

Canadian Paediatric Society
“Recommendation: Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed.”
“Circumcision is a ‘non-therapeutic’ procedure, which means it is not medically necessary.”
“After reviewing the scientific evidence for and against circumcision, the CPS does not recommend routine circumcision for newborn boys. Many paediatricians no longer perform circumcisions.”

Royal Australasian College of Physicians
“After extensive review of the literature the Royal Australasian College of Physicians reaffirms that there is no medical indication for routine neonatal circumcision.”
(those last nine words are in bold on their website, and almost all the men responsible for this statement will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. “Routine” circumcision is now *banned* in public hospitals in Australia in all states except one.)

British Medical Association
“to circumcise for therapeutic reasons where medical research has shown other techniques to be at least as effective and less invasive would be unethical and inappropriate.”

National Health Service (UK)
“Many people have strong views about whether circumcision should be carried out or not. It is not routinely performed in the UK because there is no clear clinical evidence to suggest it has any medical benefit.”

Canadian Children’s Rights Council
“It is the position of the Canadian Children’s Rights Council that ‘circumcision’ of male or female children is genital mutilation of children.”

drops in male circumcision:
USA: from 90% to 57%
Canada: from 47% to 14%
UK: from 35% to about 5% (less than 1% among non-Muslims)
Australia: 90% to 12.6% (“routine” circumcision has recently been *banned* in public hospitals in all states except one, so the rate will now be a lot lower)
New Zealand: 95% to below 3% (mostly Samoans and Tongans)
South America and Europe: never above 5%

It’s worth remembering that we wouldn’t even be having this discussion if it weren’t for the fact that 19th century doctors thought that :
a) masturbation caused various physical and mental problems (including epilepsy, convulsions, paralysis, tuberculosis etc), and
b) circumcision stopped masturbation.

Both of those sound ridiculous today I know, but if you don’t believe me, then google this: “A Short History of Circumcision in North America: In the Physicians’ Own Words”.

]]> By: Heather http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-3571 Heather Sat, 07 Feb 2009 02:31:51 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-3571 Looks like I'm late to the party... No national or international medical organization RECOMMENDS circumcision -- even the aforementioned WHO. The relationship is not cause and effect. If circumcision prevented AIDS...then why don't you see a spike in AIDS cases in all the other countries of the world. (Where they do NOT circumcise.) And why does it continue to rise here...the only country in the world that routinely circumcises? Gay circumcised boomers died in droves in the 80s but a lot of the pre-war (when most were not circumcised) older men lived. (Simply an observation albeit a good one.) To recommend it as a preventive measure is dangerous indeed...what is called for is called 'Soap'. And 'Water'. Things not found in abundance in parts of Africa. On a side note, I'm surprised by people's take on Daphne's viewpoint. I thought she was totally mellow and if anything not strident enough. I think you could at least wait and let the kid decide what he wants to do. Just watch a circumcision on youtube and tell me you'd do that all over again. I think that's all...but srsly if you think it's arrogant or intolerant to defend an innocent baby boy's nether regions, my god, YOU are the bully here. Looks like I’m late to the party…
No national or international medical organization RECOMMENDS circumcision — even the aforementioned WHO. The relationship is not cause and effect.
If circumcision prevented AIDS…then why don’t you see a spike in AIDS cases in all the other countries of the world. (Where they do NOT circumcise.)
And why does it continue to rise here…the only country in the world that routinely circumcises? Gay circumcised boomers died in droves in the 80s but a lot of the pre-war (when most were not circumcised) older men lived. (Simply an observation albeit a good one.) To recommend it as a preventive measure is dangerous indeed…what is called for is called ‘Soap’. And ‘Water’. Things not found in abundance in parts of Africa.
On a side note, I’m surprised by people’s take on Daphne’s viewpoint. I thought she was totally mellow and if anything not strident enough. I think you could at least wait and let the kid decide what he wants to do.
Just watch a circumcision on youtube and tell me you’d do that all over again.
I think that’s all…but srsly if you think it’s arrogant or intolerant to defend an innocent baby boy’s nether regions, my god, YOU are the bully here.

]]> By: Joe http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-3469 Joe Thu, 29 Jan 2009 04:42:01 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-3469 I made this post at one of the other spin off blogs generated by your video and I thought I'd post it here for your readers to consider. I wanted to share an article that was published last year in an Australian Journal, Medical Anthropology Quarterly. Before anyone completely dismisses any comparison with FGM please carefully read: <a href="http://www.circumcisionandhiv.com/files/darby_mgm_fgm_maq_0907.pdf" rel="nofollow">A Rose by Any Other Name? Rethinking the Similarities and Differences Between Male and Female Circumcision</a>. http://www.circumcisionandhiv.com/files/darby_mgm_fgm_maq_0907.pdf I think they make some very compelling points and I hope people who completely dismiss a link might be able to see how in some cases the two procedures are closer than we would like to believe. Perhaps it will give people more to think about. For further introspection, I also wanted to get some reactions to <a href="http://girlpooh.blogspot.com/2007/11/circumcision.html" rel="nofollow">a blog</a> I found. It's of an Indonesian mother praising her infant daughter for getting through her circumcision bravely. Now clearly she did this at a hospital or pedi and infact a large majority of women in her part of the world do this. We here would have put her in jail for what she did but for some reason it was important to her. It was important for her (whether it was culture or religion), she had it done by a doc, and since the kid is an infant she won't know what she was missing. My question to you all is: Is she a bad mother? If you say yes, she shouldn't have done that how is it materially different from what we do to boys? It was important for her (whether it was culture or religion), she had it done by a doc, and since the kid is an infant she won't know what she was missing. My question to you all is: Is she a bad mother? If you say yes, she shouldn't have done that, how is it materially different from what we do to boys? I made this post at one of the other spin off blogs generated by your video and I thought I’d post it here for your readers to consider. I wanted to share an article that was published last year in an Australian Journal, Medical Anthropology Quarterly. Before anyone completely dismisses any comparison with FGM please carefully read: A Rose by Any Other Name? Rethinking the Similarities and Differences Between Male and Female Circumcision.

http://www.circumcisionandhiv.com/files/darby_mgm_fgm_maq_0907.pdf

I think they make some very compelling points and I hope people who completely dismiss a link might be able to see how in some cases the two procedures are closer than we would like to believe. Perhaps it will give people more to think about.

For further introspection, I also wanted to get some reactions to a blog I found. It’s of an Indonesian mother praising her infant daughter for getting through her circumcision bravely. Now clearly she did this at a hospital or pedi and infact a large majority of women in her part of the world do this. We here would have put her in jail for what she did but for some reason it was important to her.

It was important for her (whether it was culture or religion), she had it done by a doc, and since the kid is an infant she won’t know what she was missing. My question to you all is: Is she a bad mother? If you say yes, she shouldn’t have done that how is it materially different from what we do to boys?

It was important for her (whether it was culture or religion), she had it done by a doc, and since the kid is an infant she won’t know what she was missing. My question to you all is: Is she a bad mother? If you say yes, she shouldn’t have done that, how is it materially different from what we do to boys?

]]> By: Attilla the Mum http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-3463 Attilla the Mum Wed, 28 Jan 2009 23:01:47 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-3463 This arguing makes me very sad. I adore Daphne's vlog and visit here daily for my little "fix." I do not think she was intolerant or overbearing in her views on circumcision. Each parent (or set of parents) of a boy has to make this choice, and I don't see that there is a "right" or "wrong" to it. Both sides present convincing facts; my husband and I decided to have our son circumcised, but I don't feel any need to justify my reason to do so to anyone. Not family, friends, or the Internet. I respect Daphne's decision to not have her son circumcised, as I would respect her decisions on how she will feed her child (breast or bottle) or how she will teach him to sleep through the night (cuddle or cry it out). It's not something to fight about. Each parent makes his or her own choice. This arguing makes me very sad. I adore Daphne’s vlog and visit here daily for my little “fix.” I do not think she was intolerant or overbearing in her views on circumcision. Each parent (or set of parents) of a boy has to make this choice, and I don’t see that there is a “right” or “wrong” to it. Both sides present convincing facts; my husband and I decided to have our son circumcised, but I don’t feel any need to justify my reason to do so to anyone. Not family, friends, or the Internet. I respect Daphne’s decision to not have her son circumcised, as I would respect her decisions on how she will feed her child (breast or bottle) or how she will teach him to sleep through the night (cuddle or cry it out). It’s not something to fight about. Each parent makes his or her own choice.

]]> By: Tim http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-3462 Tim Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:02:02 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-3462 In response to Daphne's notes: (1) Perhaps you're not familiar with wikipedia. At the bottom of the page, there are references to numerous studies and publications. Wikipedia is not the source. It's what's called a "reference." (2) I will look at the website you recommend, just as I will consider the data that Joe presented. I'm all for rigorous investigation and honest inquiry. Sadly (and clearly I'm not alone here) your vlog communicated "I'm right and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot/bad parent" when it should have communicated "I'm opposed to circumcision for X reasons supported by Y research." This could have been a chance to gently inform others. Instead, you blew it by trying to look cool. Not that I'm surprised--the title of your blog is a dead giveaway. (3) Just to be clear: I am not pro-circumcision. I am pro-reasonability, pro-honesty, and pro-inquiry. In response to Daphne’s notes:

(1) Perhaps you’re not familiar with wikipedia. At the bottom of the page, there are references to numerous studies and publications. Wikipedia is not the source. It’s what’s called a “reference.”

(2) I will look at the website you recommend, just as I will consider the data that Joe presented. I’m all for rigorous investigation and honest inquiry. Sadly (and clearly I’m not alone here) your vlog communicated “I’m right and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot/bad parent” when it should have communicated “I’m opposed to circumcision for X reasons supported by Y research.” This could have been a chance to gently inform others. Instead, you blew it by trying to look cool. Not that I’m surprised–the title of your blog is a dead giveaway.

(3) Just to be clear: I am not pro-circumcision. I am pro-reasonability, pro-honesty, and pro-inquiry.

]]> By: betsy http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-3461 betsy Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:39:16 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-3461 Could you have been any more arrogant? I hope you don't raise your child to be so narrow minded and judgemental. It's not a pretty picture. I'm surprised you have this vidoe on your site. You obviously don't see how it makes you look. Could you have been any more arrogant? I hope you don’t raise your child to be so narrow minded and judgemental. It’s not a pretty picture. I’m surprised you have this vidoe on your site. You obviously don’t see how it makes you look.

]]> By: Tired of it http://coolmom.com/2009/01/26/on-momversation-circumcision/#comment-3456 Tired of it Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:26:41 +0000 http://coolmom.com/?p=2338#comment-3456 In full disclosure, I want to say that I came across this first on Alice's web page and already posted a comment there. This will be my second time ever posting a comment on a blog. I am just so tired of this crap. The problem is not that you (or others) have a strong opinion on this topic. The problem is that in every other Momversation I have seen, the format has always been one in which the first mother is looking for feedback or ideas about how to handle a certain difficulty. She is inviting a conversation. You were just pontificating, which is fine, but is not what people expect when they watch those videos and apparently is not what the other participants expect. It was poor form because of the context. And just because some of us are REALLY tired of mothers bashing each other over the choices we make for our families does not mean that we are living in Strawberry Shortcake Land. It means that we find it tiresome when we see yet another example of it, particularly in the context of a "Momversation", where, if memory serves correct, there was somewhat recently a conversation on the topic of judgmental people butting in to each other's parenting. So, go ahead, pontificate and judge all you want. Just know that some of us might have been a little more open to your point of view if you hadn't been so anti-conversational about it. So, so tired of this. Who does it serve? In full disclosure, I want to say that I came across this first on Alice’s web page and already posted a comment there. This will be my second time ever posting a comment on a blog. I am just so tired of this crap. The problem is not that you (or others) have a strong opinion on this topic. The problem is that in every other Momversation I have seen, the format has always been one in which the first mother is looking for feedback or ideas about how to handle a certain difficulty. She is inviting a conversation. You were just pontificating, which is fine, but is not what people expect when they watch those videos and apparently is not what the other participants expect. It was poor form because of the context. And just because some of us are REALLY tired of mothers bashing each other over the choices we make for our families does not mean that we are living in Strawberry Shortcake Land. It means that we find it tiresome when we see yet another example of it, particularly in the context of a “Momversation”, where, if memory serves correct, there was somewhat recently a conversation on the topic of judgmental people butting in to each other’s parenting. So, go ahead, pontificate and judge all you want. Just know that some of us might have been a little more open to your point of view if you hadn’t been so anti-conversational about it. So, so tired of this. Who does it serve?

]]>