Thread: Potentially personal, perhaps embarassing

Of course the research about AIDS is solid, but what happened with the abstinence or condom way of not contracting it As far as being an issue with women - I wouldn't be so sure about predicting society 15 years from now. It's a question whether you would circumcise your child (or perhaps have somebody else circumcise him). Yes it's your choice, and I'd rather transfer that choice to the child.

Of course, if it comes to it, the foreskin of my child is a small price to pay to save my marriage, so I suppose under certain circumstances I may be persuaded to go with it.

I'd have it done. When I was 13 or 14 I had to have it done for some stupid medical reason. Not a fun experiance, and not one I would want to put my kid through.

Originally Posted by gugi

Of course the research about AIDS is solid, but what happened with the abstinence or condom way of not contracting it

Yeah, I thought this was a weird argument as well. When you think circumcision is a good way to avoid STDs, you really need to stop and think again.

No one is saying it's a replacement for condoms or abstinence. The fact is that we live in a time where being overly cautious is almost enough, and that WHEN an accident happens you can't turn back time to better protect yourself.

So given that condoms should always be worn (unless trying to conceive) and that abstinence is a good practice, the reasons for leaving it intact do not out-weigh the possible benefits (to me).

I wouldn't deny my offspring any chance, slight as it may be, to live the longest healthiest life possible.

Is there anyone who can voice an opinion on wishing it hadn't been done to them? or wishing it had? because otherwise it's just speculation from biased viewpoints.

Originally Posted by gugi

It's a question whether you would circumcise your child (or perhaps have somebody else circumcise him). Yes it's your choice, and I'd rather transfer that choice to the child.

Are you asking if we'd actually perform the procedure? Because no, I would not try to do it myself. I'd definitely have it done by a surgeon, with sterile equipment and proper aftercare.

But then you would have to restrict the child's ability to choose otherwise until they were adult enough to decide for them self, which may cause greater problems, for them and your relationship.

(p.s. I'm mostly playing devil's advocate, the choice is yours and may not incur any negativity either way, but it's never a bad thing to weigh ALL options/outcomes.)

According to some google results, infant circumcision is not without risk in and by itself... several die each year in the USA and the mortality rate increases with the age at time of circumcision.

Some researchers doubt circumcision is much of a factor in female-to-male HIV transmission in the US since US sexual habits are much different than Africa. I wonder which is higher risk in the US... complications due to circumcision or uncircumcised HIV?

Originally Posted by Russel Baldridge

Are you asking if we'd actually perform the procedure?

No, not at all I started the thread as a fun experiment to see what's gonna come out of a less politically charged but controversial enough thread. I believe most of my posts have been really tongue-in-cheek. I worded the initial question not too precisely, so I thought it'd be fun to note this possibility of non-medical circumcision in a 'roundabout way'.
Actually in my country the turkish minority practices child circumcision (I believe it's around age 7). It's a religious practice and it is often performed by a religious figure, not a medical one. So if you happen to be circumcised in my part of the world you'll be looked down upon as you'd be presumed to be muslim. But that's a whole other topic on bigotry, that I think we don't need to branch into.

And of course azjoe is right - it'll be interesting to compare the two statistics.

Oh, well, I certainly had fun with this odd thread, it looks it may be dying soon, so I thought I'd say this.

HOOP! (too obscure?)

Anyhow, no way to circumcision. I was not circumcised, and my 2 boys are also not circumcised, against the wishes of my wife and mother-in-law. And the funny thing was my wife was not swayed by the statistics, but by the fact that I wanted my boys to be like me (why do we marry women again? oh yeah... see coochie razor thread!)

I absolutely would not back down to my wife and MIL on this one. It definitely put a strain on my marriage, but for reasons that will become apparent soon, I had first-hand experience to back up my staunch position. And now that my wife is surrounded by uncut ones, I think she has become largely desensitized to the issue (but not to the item!).

Recently, I looked up the rates of penile cancer in men vs breast cancer in women, because one of the reasons put out there for circumcision is to prevent penile cancer. IIRC (and you should look up the numbers yourself), the rate of penile cancer in the US is about 1 in 1 million, and for breast cancer are about 1 in 1000. Based on those numbers, I think we should start a campaign for pre-emptive mastectomies to prevent breast cancer. Wait... what? Why not? Oh yeah! (see coochie razor thread)

Mind you, there can be problems with foreskins that have nothing to do with cancer or STDs... phimosis is a condition where the opening in the foreskin is too narrow to allow it to be retracted fully (or at all) when sporting an erection... related to that is an attached frenulum, where part of the foreskin is still attached to the glans and also prevents full retraction. Both of these can make for uncomfortable, perhaps dangerous (think tearing foreskin) sex.

Full disclosure... I had an attached frenulum, and had it surgically detached rather than be circumcised... really glad I didn't remove it, but let me tell you, I was white as a ghost with pain afterwards when the local wore off for about a day. And that was just *part* of my foreskin cut! I can't imagine how much it would have hurt had I been circumcised! My wife (then girlfriend at the time) says she never wants to see me like that again, but I keep telling her, it's better than losing it and totally worth keeping, and I would do that same thing again in a heartbeat. One of my sons appears to have phimosis, and our pediatrician has suggested stretching with hydrocortizone cream every night after his bath... it is definitely working, my wife even agrees, but it is very slow (months, almost a year now).

My wife argues that if our son(s) need to be circumcised, she will kill me for not letting her do it when they were babies. I told her I will go to the hospital with them and take care of them afterwards if she won't, and that it is a fully-informed decision they should make for themselves when they are old enough to make it.

I know better than to tell her she should get a double mastectomy because her mom has had pre-cancerous breast cells (see coochie razor thread... both because I like breasts, and there would be no coochie for quite some time if I were to float such a stupid, albeit logical, idea).

"I say 'Let the doberman have its ears!'"

In the main we Scots tend to keep our foreskins. Handy to have something to guard against the midgies and the ticks that climb up yer kilt and try to attach to the bell end. And it appears that it might have some effect if we ever have to lift our kilts high and charge a US posse - the Devils in skirts!!
Highly unlikely of course gentlemen...

Originally Posted by paulo

HOOP! (too obscure?)

"I say 'Let the doberman have its ears!'"

I have to watch Arrested Development again, soon.