Does anyone else disagree with male circumcision?
I know that there are both plusses and minuses of the procedure, but I think that the way the sexual organs are modified MUST be a choice for the individual, when they’re old enough to choose.
Parents must choose what is best for their baby, yes, but this is in relation to the part of their body that will be used for SEX. It’s not something that is the parents’ buisness in the same way as looking after the child’s teeth or giving injections – their child’s general health is something that affects the parents, but the child’s sex life will not be shared in the same way at all.
I would be disturbed (not just because I am a girl) at the idea of my parents being able to just say they wanted this invasion of my privacy, at an age I would have had no idea what was happening, and been too young for anasthetic
I know studies have found that circumcision reduces male HIV risk. Do you know that studies have also shown that FEMALE circumcision could reduce HIV risk? Do you agree with that to
I live in the UK, where circumcised men are a minority, and women tend to (as far as I know) prefer uncircumcised. I think the view of women is totally subjective and cultural.
A vaccine is not the same. It does not involve any mutilation to the body or anything that will affect the individual’s life more than just to prevent illness.
Related posts:
11 comments
Leave a Reply
Interesting. I circumcised my son, and I regret it. My husband insisted that I agreed to have it done. I wish that I would have protected my son more.
AIDS is much better prevented by using a condom. The small protection given by circumcision is NOT worth genital mutilation. I completely disagree with circumcision.
We could also prevent AIDS by just cutting off the penis. Would they do that too?
From everything I read about it, the negatives far outweigh the very minor positives. If I had a son, we wouldn’t have done it.
I dislike any mutilation. Despite the religious reasons to circumcise males, and the studies that point to reduced incidence of HIV in circumcised males, I would not circumcise my sons.
i don’t believe in it,how do you think people lived before there we’re tools. in one piece
Religiously speaking, there is no christian reason to do it, but there are a few reasons to still do it. I am glad I am circumcised. I don’t know any guy that is pissed off that his parents had him circumcised. In fact you get teased more when you are uncircumcised. I don’t want my kid going through that. Plus women seem to find circumcision a more aesthetic look. And it needs all the help it can get.
i am totally against it. i am not circumcised and neither is my son. i don’t believe that there are any advantages, only disadvatages. i think it is absolutely barbaric. i think that parents that have this procedure performed on their infants should be arrested for child abuse. i also think that sons that have been cicumcised should sue their parents in a court of law.
i believe that 80% of the men in the world are not circumcised, but 80% of the men in the u.s. are.
I think that you are overreacting, probably because you are female. I’m a girl too, and I used to have the same reaction to the idea of circumcision as well.
But it turns out that most guys really don’t care, and most people who are circumcised think that it looks better than an uncircumcised penis.
There have also been many men who have had to get a circumcision later in their life because of problems with erections and the like. It would be better to get one as a baby rather than as an adult. Ouch.
There are other studies that show a reduced risk for cervical cancer in women if a man is circumsized. Also, other studies have shown that women get more pleasure from men who are circumsized.
In Jewish culture, they circumsize on the 8th day after birth, which is the best and SAFEST day for the baby if the baby has to be cut or operated on. Because "vitamin K" is at the highest level it will EVER be in that boy’s life (see the excerpt from my source list).
Also, you can’t just say that parents do not have a right to invide the person’s privacy like that, especially since the body part in question is involved with sex later on in life.
The reason you can’t say that is because the human race has associated almost every concievable body part for the use of sexual activities. Sex is truly a full body experience. Having said that, does that mean that, as a parent, you can’t be medically involved with any body parts that MIGHT be used for sex later on in the child’s adult life?
You are a girl. Have you had the new inoculation that will prevent some forms of human papillomavirus (HPV) which can prevent some forms of cervical cancer?
Consider this excerpt from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention:
"The HPV vaccine is recommended for 11-12 year-old girls, and can be given to girls as young as 9. The vaccine is also recommended for 13-26 year-old girls/women who have not yet received or completed the vaccine series. …
Why is the HPV vaccine recommended for such young girls?
Ideally, females should get the vaccine before they are sexually active. This is because the vaccine is most effective in girls/women who have not yet acquired any of the four HPV types covered by the vaccine. Girls/women who have not been infected with any of those four HPV types will get the full benefits of the vaccine."
Now, what makes a 11 or 12 year old girl different from a baby when it comes to this vaccine? This vaccine involves what will be used for sex later in life, so what right does a parent have to make their child receive this vaccine?! It’s not their business!
You see the problem in the logic? Just because something might or will be used for sex later in life does not make it off limits to a parent’s medical discretion. If I have children, I will have my boy circumsized, and if I have a girl, she will get the vaccine when she is old enough. Those are the decisions of a parent who cares about their child’s health and the health of their future husband or wife.
I don’t believe in it. It isn’t a part of my religion and to me, the medical evidence doesn’t support that kind of mutilation. I live in the US where it is commonly done to males but I would never allow it to be done to any of my children–male or female. I think it’s barbaric.
rlee1185 Says:
March 10th, 2010 at 9:41 am
There are other studies that show a reduced risk for cervical cancer in women if a man is circumsized. Also, other studies have publicized that women get more pleasure from men who are circumsized
………………………………………..
Would you supply us with the studies your referring to with your above comments?
Soap and water works for me and it works for my two adult sons that are natural(intact foreskin). They have never had a problem with being natural. In fact, they told me how much they appreciated being natural(intact foreskin), rather then being mutilated at birth by being circumcised.
It not unusual for men who have been violated at birth to perpetuate that violence/mutilation on to their own newborn sons.
The male foreskin exists because that’s what Nature/Creator/God wants. The foreskins purpose can only be experienced and enjoyed by a male who still has his. It’s been said, that once a woman has sex with a natural male(intact foreskin), she prefers not to go back to males that have been genitally altered.