Do you know why UK men are rarely circumcized when it’s the norm in the U.S?
At some point the UK government decided that circumcision wouldn’t be covered by the national health insurance.
And just like that. It went out of fashion.
I’m sure the greedy U.S insurance companies would be more than happy to stop covering that service.
Fight fire with fire.
Get the insurance companies to stop covering it. And we can finally save boys from being mutilated.
amab genital mutilation makes bottom surgery more complicated for transfems
yes it’s also immoral and shouldn’t be done on infants of any gender who can’t give consent (and should be illegal, as should intersex genital mutilation, aka “surgical correction”)
What do you call a discount circumcision?
A ripoff.
I want my foreskin back. I’m thinking about restoring mine.
from all of the research I’ve done into the matter, it’s a huge amount of work/effort for not much of a payoff. there are a lot of options/paths to go down, and - admittedly - it’s been almost a 15 years since I really looked into it, so there may have been some worthwhile advances since then, but, given the state of things at the time, I doubt it.
but I don’t mean to discourage you, and what I might have deemed “worth it” or not, you might feel differently. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
if you lost a whole inch from your circumcision, they did it wrong.
that said, when I was around 18 or so, I really had it out with my parents over circumcising me. at 47, I’m still unhappy about it.
It’s unconsentual genital mutilation of babies, a beyond cruel excercise - unless there is a clear medical reason
I didn’t even know I was circumcised at birth until like halfway through highschool and I didn’t really care after finding out. And having now seen penises that are uncircumcised, I’m kinda glad I was. From my perspective, it didn’t hurt and I didn’t even know until 17ish years later. Everything works perfectly normally.
All of that was a buildup to a genuine question of why do you feel so upset by it? I don’t mean to be argumentative or dismissive, just want to see the point of view from someone else
So the problem is a lot of Americans/Catholics think a circumcision is something responsible adults do to their children to help them avoid potential health problems. They also erroneously believe the foreskin serves no purpose and is one of those we evolved with it, but it is useless kind of things.
They dont know the truth that it actually has a large number of nerve endings and its removal was originally pushed for to reduce the pleasure boys felt from masturbation, in the hope they would not masturbate. Because sex should only be for reproduction according to those who originally pushed for circumcision… It is like what is done to some women in muslim communities. Difference being woman have even more nerve endings in the clitoris and men can still experience some pleasure without the foreskin, but much less. This is why circumcision is often considered mutilation, except for those rare medical exceptions. Parents are unknowingly removing their childs right to sexual pleasure under the guise it is for their health.
It really needs to end as simple hygiene is all that is needed for the health reasons.
we all have our own feelings about it. I’m not trying to say that the way you feel about your own circumcision is right or wrong, or how any man who decides - on their own, as an informed adult - is right or wrong to do so.
but I would vehemently argue that it is an adult man’s decision to make, not a parent’s decision to make for their infant son-- unless some medical condition makes it necessary to do so at that time (which are quite rare). and, yes, I understand that there are religious considerations, but, as an atheist, I’m not so sympathetic to that, either, as I classify all genital mutilation in the same category, regardless of age or gender: it is a decision to be made by the subject of the procedure, and only when they are a consenting, informed adult.
As someone who was circumcised for the ‘medical hygiene’ reasons when it was more popular I am sick and tired of seeing all circumcision lumped together as mutilation. Sure it was probably unnecessary as I am not aware of having a condition that made it necessary in my case, but it was well done and everything has been positive for me. Those that get it done for medical reasons being called mutilation would be offensive.
It certainly should end as a practice, especially as a religious practice done by non-medically trained people, but stigmatizing people who had it done as being mutilated is insulting.
Those that get it done for medical reasons being called mutilation would be offensive.
Right, because they weren’t mutilated, they had to have a procedure done for a medical reason.
Any non-medically necessary surgery to a child’s genitals is mutilation. They have no way to consent, and anything short of a medical necessity is the parent making massive changes to their child’s life based on their preferences. To make the point crystal clear:
- If I have a kid and the arm ends up gangrenous, we would remove it as it would be medically necessary for the child’s well-being
- If I have a kid and think it’s cool to have one arm, I would be trying to mutilate my child by removing it for no reason
How is performing a medically unnecessary surgery on a child’s genitals not mutilation? Again, you’re changing their body surgically without their consent for no reason aside from ignorant beliefs.
I dislike the ‘mutilated’ label being applied and take it as an insult because of the negative connotations despite not personally having any downsides. It is like claiming that everyone who is overweight based on BMI is unhealthy despite many athletes having a high BMI due to having a lot of muscle.
Plus the person I was responding to said adults who voluntarily chose to get circumcised are mutilated themselves. With that logic ear piercings and voluntarily removing annoying, but not medically probematic moles is mutilation. My point is that you can’t just ignore the negative connotations and use a broad brush to describe people while claiming it is technically accurate.
No, it should not be done to babies without a medical necessity. That doesn’t mean calling everyone who has been circumcised mutilated won’t come across as insulting.
Circumcision is and should only be a medically necessary procedure. I’ve never heard anyone say medically necessary circumcision is mutilation, but I’m from Europe where most men aren’t circumcised, so there’s that. Whoever says it’s mutilation when it’s medically justified is ignorant.
Even if it was ‘well done’, you have literally lost nerves and sensitivity in the region leading to an objectively worse experience.
The solution is obvious, don’t chop kids genitals for no legitimate reason. Doesn’t matter if you came out okay or whatever nonsense.
Without arguing either for or against the practice, losing feeling is an outdated idea. It’s been studied and shown that circumcised men are just as sensitive as uncircumcised
I am sick and tired of seeing all circumcision lumped together as mutilation
it’s the definition of the word. sure, it carries a lot of negative connotations that may not have affected you the same way, and you may have, personally, appreciated your circumcision, but that doesn’t invalidate the feelings of others. this isn’t some zero-sum situation where other people being upset about it somehow invalidated your experience.
Many people can feel different ways about things. That’s called society. A key part of civilization is our ability to all live together with many different people feeling different ways about things. In fact, a huge advance in civilization - no shit - is that, several thousand years ago, we stop killing each other over this very issue. REALLY.
In a much more contemporary context, it’s just not necessary. Most recently, as recently as the late 1970s and early 1980s, a now-debunked study pushed the idea that it was, at least “more hygienic” to circumcise males, but that was based on shaky and now-debunked studies. In modern medicine, circumcision is no longer recommended at birth except in rare cases of medical necessity of urinary or other birth defects. Exceptions also exist in some religions, Judaism most prominently, not for medical necessity, but as an alignment with a belief based on ancient mythology, not unlike the genital mutilations some women undergo in Islam — also widely/globally denounced.
As a follow on, is your username supposed to be “Holmes” but you decided to wing it on the spelling test?
I’m also circumcised and find getting bent out of shape over it 18 years later to be… an unusual response.
aww, did that sound good before you posted it?
Yep! After too!
You were wrong, unfortunately
If we were a couple of dudes negging on each other in a bar over whiskey shots, I’d put up with this, because we’d end up hooking up in the end, but online? There’s no goddamn point.
Later
It’s true. Chatting about circumcision in a bar most often ends in showing each other your dicks.
Cya.
Obviously most circumsised people have no issues with their dicks. And a lot probably sees it as a positive. I have heard a people claim that they look better.
Doing plastic surgery on babies is still a bit weird to me.
There are several possible reasons why other men might be upset, although your own equipment still works perfectly normally:
-
Just like women’s sexual responses differ, men’s sexual responses may differ, as well. I’ve learned from a friend, who’s had many male partners, that some men get intense pleasure from manipulation of their foreskin. Some can even reach orgasm that way. I’ve learned from several (intact) men on Reddit and Lemmy that their primary source of sexual sensation is their foreskin, rather than their glans. Losing a major source of pleasure could be upsetting.
-
This same friend also reports that, in his experience, intact men have better awareness of their own state of arousal, and better control of it. In brief, they can “last longer.” This is anecdotal, of course, but I seem to recall reading some research to back that up. That’s part of the reason why he’s upset by his being circumcised.
-
“Circumcision” is not just one thing. It ranges from the traditional bris (a small snip at the tip of the penis, so that the tip of the glans just peeks out) to amputation of the entire mobile skin system of the penis (about 15 sq. in. of adult tissue gone). I would imagine that men who have drum-tight skin on their penises, and must use lube to facilitate penetration or masturbation, might not like it, whereas a man whose glans was still covered when his penis was flaccid might not notice much difference.
-
The dorsal nerve of the penis can be severed during the procedure, removing sensation from the glans almost entirely, leading to erectile and performance issues, as well as greatly reduced enjoyment of sex.
-
The healing of the circumcision wound can go not-quite-perfectly, leading to adhesions, assymetry, tight frenulums, phantom pain, and scarring. Journalist Gary Shteyngart wrote an essay about the odyssey of pain that he was thrown into when a skin bridge (an adhesion) on his penis became infected. Worse, I recall a letter published in Savage Love from a man whose circumcision scar was so thick and inelastic that it caused the end of his penis to go ischemic, then necrotic, and then fall off when he was an infant. He’s left with a stub of a penis, and a pretty good reason to be upset about circumcision, I’d say.
ETA: I did not think of this, but @theleadensea@sh.itjust.works pointed out that removal of the foreskin complicates bottom surgery for trans women, I would guess because it gives the surgeon less tissue to work with.
-
So, if you’ve every had to clean out the inside of your son’s penis, you might feel a little bit differently. Circumcision was considered a standard hygienic practice for decades. There are some marginal benefits to health and safety, particularly wrt transmission of STDs. But given the modernizations in health and safety (particularly condoms and milder skin-friendly soap) it definitely feels archaic.
I’m circumcized. I don’t think it’s a big deal. My son isn’t (largely at the objections of my wife who was much more anti-circumcision than I am). So far, he hasn’t seemed to mind having a foreskin. It strikes me as something people just like to get mad at. It has no discernible impact either of our lives, except in the case where I’m giving him a bath.
Compared to, say, the consequences of laws around abortion or modern contraception or vaccination, this seems trivial to the point of being a deliberately engineered distraction.
you aren’t supposed to use soap on genitals
here are some marginal benefits to health and safety, particularly wrt transmission of STDs.
Bullshit.
So, if you’ve every had to clean out the inside of your son’s penis, you might feel a little bit differently. Circumcision was considered a standard hygienic practice for decades. There are some marginal benefits to health and safety, particularly wrt transmission of STDs. But given the modernizations in health and safety (particularly condoms and milder skin-friendly soap) it definitely feels archaic.
It feels archaic because this is archaic bullshit. it takes about a second to pull back the foreskin and wash it with the rest of the penis/pubic area during a normal bath the bathing a baby/toddler, and teaching a child this very normal habit is very simple and easy. The vast majority of human males on Earth handle this very normal task, and have done so for the entire existence of humanity.
Just because the misinformation you just repeated was pushed by the American medical establishment for a few decades doesn’t make it fact, and it has been widely repudiated by the medical establishments everywhere else, and even here in the US in recent decades.
It is no longer widely recommended, even in the US.
And your personal preference isn’t really medically relevant.
The vast majority of human males on Earth handle this very normal task, and have done so for the entire existence of humanity.
Go ask around the medical community and you’ll discover quite a few didn’t handle it well. Kids don’t do a good job of washing. That area is easily infected, even setting aside STDs. The procedure was created precisely in response to these perfectly normal human conditions, along with a litany of other - now largely archaic - practices for avoiding illness and infection.
It is no longer widely recommended, even in the US.
Even that fact varies state-by-state. It is no longer automatically covered by health insurance, which has resulted in a large drop-off in the practice domestically. But then that’s been the US standard for medicine going on 50 years.
And your personal preference isn’t really medically relevant.
It’s highly relevant, since parents are the ultimate arbiters of their childrens’ health and well-being.
I think you are misinformed.
Published by Nature in 2023.
“What is the medical evidence on non-therapeutic child circumcision?”
We conclude that non-therapeutic circumcision performed on otherwise healthy infants or children has little or no high-quality medical evidence to support its overall benefit. Moreover, it is associated with rare but avoidable harm and even occasional deaths. From the perspective of the individual boy, there is no medical justification for performing a circumcision prior to an age that he can assess the known risks and potential benefits, and choose to give or withhold informed consent himself.
Go ask around the medical community and you’ll discover quite a few didn’t handle it well. Kids don’t do a good job of washing.
I have, and this isn’t true. it’s also not supported by the medical documentation available. Instructing kids, especially when you start from an early age, to develop proper hygiene habits is pretty easy. I’ve even borne witness to it many times personally, although I’m not necessarily offering my personal experience as proof.
It’s highly relevant
not when you’re making claims about everyone everywhere. what matters there is evidence to back up your claims, which you have yet to provide.
so, since you were the one who initially made such claims… please back them up from reliable sources such as the AMA, for example.
I have, and this isn’t true.
I’ve got a friend who is a PA that has given me some very unpleasant stories about infected foreskins.
Instructing kids, especially when you start from an early age
Sure. People can do lots of things if they are instructed well at an early age. But then people aren’t instructed well. And that’s where you run into problems.
I’ve even borne witness to it many times personally
Fascinated to hear all the times you watched someone else wash their dick
not when you’re making claims about everyone everywhere
Yes. These are universal problems for the male population. And circumcision is one solution so popular and so common that it’s practiced the world over.
you were the one who initially made such claims
I assure you that I’m not the first person to suggest the benefits of circumcision.
OK kid come back when you have some actual evidence to back up your claims, lol
Your anecdotal claims amount to a pile of nothing but personal preference in Internet story time. And while you are perfectly welcome to your personal opinions, you are not entitled to spread claims of “truth“ without backing it up with actual evidence from trusted sources.
Your anecdotal claims amount to a pile of nothing.
Tell it to the guy with infected penis skin.
It’s highly relevant, since parents are the ultimate arbiters of their childrens’ health and well-being.
Precisely. Parents should protect their children from genital mutilation.
And, unfortunately, for decades, particularly in the United States, parents were misled with medical misinformation that told them it was medically necessary (or “recommended”) to circumcise their babies. Thankfully, that is no longer the case. Unfortunately, it is still culturally reinforced, although that is fortunately fading.
But it will likely be several more decades before that misinformation and cultural force finally fades completely.
It has no discernible impact either of our lives,
Then why would you chop it off?
Just for starters, you’re not “chopping” anything.
Past that, again, it’s for a marginal benefit in hygiene.
You should probably cut your earlobes off too then, you don’t really need them and it’s possible they could get infected at some point in your life. And I’m sure you shave your and your children bald regularly, right? You don’t need hair and it removes the possibility of lice which can carry blood-born diseases.
I think you’ve got a very weak argument for it. It seems sensible to me that elective procedures should have clear benefits to outweigh the corresponding risks of performing it; there are always risks with performing medical procedures.
And w.r.t. you comment on no chopping — it’s a piece of skin that is attached to a human body, it doesn’t just fall off by itself. You do have to cut it. Choppy choppy.
Doesn’t mind having a perfectly natural unmutilated body?!
Naturalistic fallacy aside, I missed that mark when I got corrective surgery for scoliosis. I’ve also got a few tattoos and piercings that any proper orthodox Jew would find abominable.
My son spent three months in the NICU and had I don’t even know how many medical interventions during that time. His “perfectly natural unmutilated body” would have been a 1.5oz corpse.
We’re both way past circumcision as the defining issue of our lives.
One is medical necessity and one is religious bullshit inflicting pain and assuming consent. Go do something productive with your life… Vote or something.
Its OK to move past the trauma, it’s not OK to assume everybody should go through that progression just because you did.
I certainly mind having the body I got.
You are probably old enough to consent to changes and to take responsibility for your decisions for the rest of your own life.
I wasn’t when I was forced into this body.
What do they want, a refund?
To stop the cultural practice of male genital mutilation and break the norms that doom their sons?
Full respect if you were speaking sarcastically
Oh 100% sarcastic.
I agree genital mutilation that is not medically necessary is bad. They just could have made the point/their aim clearer.
They just could have made the point/their aim clearer.
I appreciate the attempt to still make a pun, even after getting a bit of a smack
I honestly wasn’t trying to be punny, that’s just how it came out. But I’ll take it.
With interest.
Gimme that fiveskin.
Could’ve at least saved it for a little foreskin calamari is all.
Half off
I could not, would not, with a mohel
Would not, should not, with hot oil
Hedwig approves. His inch is still very angry.
upvote for the reference
I once met John Cameron Mitchell in a bar in the East Village in 2009. Total sweetheart.
that’s awesome!
I remember, trying to be friendly, I offered to buy him a shot or a drink or something, and the bartended (who was also quite a character) was very offended that he would ever charge “Johnny” for a drink in the first place, lol. we had a good laugh and round of shots about it :)
type shit
shit
shit
Love the gang sign the kid is holding up
