Should circumcision be the person's OWN choice?

[Kasierith]

OK, that's one side of the argument. I would reply that many babies die from complications resulting from circumcision surgery. Approximately 117 deaths annually. That is 117 totally avoidable deaths! This is surgery that is totally unnecessary. We are talking about neonatal here, long before any symptoms of Phimosis or Balanitis could present themselves.
http://www.circumstitions.com/death.html

Deaths from penile cancer, which never occurs in circumcised males: 310 every year. 1570 new cases a year (http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/penile). So ya... over twice the number of deaths, even given that the majority of the 117 deaths are due to improper procedure such as using burning techniques instead of slicing.

Incidence of phimosis is drastically higher than penile cancer.

You are woefully ignorant on the male anatomy and it really offends me. Especially since some mindless drones seem to be blowing smoke up your arse at your perceived (yet utterly incorrect) knowledge on this subject.

If the ability to extent a rational argument evades you, always resort to ad hominems, am I right?

The foreskin is actually fused the glans at birth, it is only as the child gets much older that the foreskin is able to be rolled back. (so the exact opposite of what you describe above "it becomes more, connected as time goes on" In some cases not even till after puberty. This is NATURAL. You won't know this due to your ignorance, so I suggest you go read up some more before coming back to this thread.

The ritual of circumcising an 8 day old baby involves forcibly tearing the foreskin from the glans.

Partially true; the main reason why it cannot be rolled back is that the tip opening is physically smaller, and thus cannot roll back as easily. Its attachment to the gland is, again in relative terms, not as substantial, and at a young age separates mores easily even if later its overall contact is decreased allowing it to become more contractile. I could use several sources to go into detail about the slightly different method of operation in circumcising teens vs babies, but I don't think it would exactly be an appropriate discussion for this forum.

Physically tearing it off is not something done in modern hospital settings, and ultimately not adhering to standardized practices is one of the things leading to an inflated incidence rate of complications.

[capitano666]

I see a lot of discussions about the benefits or lack thereof of circumcision, that's a pointless argument and it doesn't answer the OP's question.
The thread title is whether it should be a person's OWN choice, doesn't really matter if it's a benefit or not, it is something which is being imposed on a kid.


Let's say, taking it to the extreme just for the sake of the argument, that in the future a new medical practice emerges which consists on invasive brain surgery on a newborn in order to slightly reduce the chances of it developing schizophrenia when it grows up. Is it still ethical to perform changes to a child's body in order to give him some advantage he maybe won't even ever need?

[Calibar]

Yea cause that's not subjective at all right.

The myth that it is a breeding ground for bacteria is the most common reason I see in support of it, which is bogus. Your dick is a breeding ground for bacteria whether you are cut or uncut, fortunately we have this stuff called soap and hot water so it's not an issue either way if you have a sense of personal hygiene. I'm happy my parent's left me intact and think it should be up to the person, not the parents.

One of my mother's friends got an infection when he was 18 because he had 1 grain of sand that got stuck inside the foreskin. He used to wash twice a day and everything but he still ended up having to get a circumcision because of the infection.

[Deleted]

Actually getting back to the original question, I'm probably not going to circumcise my future boyos as infants, but nothing's set in stone. And I'd most definitely talk about it to them when they're a wee older, maybe pre-teen years if they'd want the operation done. Having been on both sides of the fence thanks to my operation being done after already having started my sexlife, I think I have reasonably good grasp of what comes with it, at least way better than most people in this thread.

Mindboggling how people can still compare it to female circumcision which is just WRONG.

[capitano666]

One of my mother's friends got an infection when he was 18 because he had 1 grain of sand that got stuck inside the foreskin. He used to wash twice a day and everything but he still ended up having to get a circumcision because of the infection.

I can't help but wonder in which kind of beach have he been....
If said grain of sand got literally stuck inside the skin it makes little difference between foreskin or any other skin.

Mindboggling how people can still compare it to female circumcision which is just WRONG.

Both are genital mutilations performed at young age and against the subject's will, initially conceived to restrict sexuality and handed down through generations due to religious beliefs.

The fact that one of the two (the male one) is not as painful and is also performed at later age for therapeutic reasons is merely coincidental and, I believe, not the aim of this thread.

[Annapolis]

I see a lot of discussions about the benefits or lack thereof of circumcision, that's a pointless argument and it doesn't answer the OP's question.
The thread title is whether it should be a person's OWN choice, doesn't really matter if it's a benefit or not, it is something which is being imposed on a kid.


Let's say, taking it to the extreme just for the sake of the argument, that in the future a new medical practice emerges which consists on invasive brain surgery on a newborn in order to slightly reduce the chances of it developing schizophrenia when it grows up. Is it still ethical to perform changes to a child's body in order to give him some advantage he maybe won't even ever need?

I agree with you that this is the argument, although your hypothetical is slightly misleading because brain surgery isn't quite the same.

The problem is that this discussion can't occur in this thread. People can't get past the idea that circumcision has shown to have real medical benefits according to studies and reputable sources. This fact matters because if there was a medical procedure where the risks don't outweigh the benefits then obviously that shouldn't be done at a young age. But in this case the benefits do outweigh the risks so we should be having the discussion you indicated.

The reason I think it should be left up to the parents is that by the time the children would be able to make the decision themselves they may have already had unprotected sex and the surgery has a higher complication rate. That's not to say it should be done to every child, but just left to the parents to decide as other medical procedures are at that age.

[capitano666]

I agree with you that this is the argument, although your hypothetical is slightly misleading because brain surgery isn't quite the same.

Not at all, a lot of guys are thinking with their dicks

The problem is that this discussion can't occur in this thread. People can't get past the idea that circumcision has shown to have real medical benefits according to studies and reputable sources. This fact matters because if there was a medical procedure where the risks don't outweigh the benefits then obviously that shouldn't be done at a young age. But in this case the benefits do outweigh the risks so we should be having the discussion you indicated.

The reason I think it should be left up to the parents is that by the time the children would be able to make the decision themselves they may have already had unprotected sex and the surgery has a higher complication rate. That's not to say it should be done to every child, but just left to the parents to decide as other medical procedures are at that age.

The point is that we are not talking about a vaccine, which is something you DO to the child with the benefit of saving his life.
I have yet to be persuaded about the benefits argument anyway, aside from cases of phimosis (which is fixed via circumcision at any age) I've never personally heard of anyone who had foreskin-related issues. Whatever it may be is not worth forcing your decision on another person unless it is life-saving.

[Dasffion]

But by all means, circumcise your baby. One bad decision doesn't make you a bad parent, but don't be surprised when they resent you for it later.

I would have resented my parents if they made me wait till I was an adult and could remember the pain to get a circumcision. I certainly don't resent them for doing it when I was a child.

[Funt Case]

I would have resented my parents if they made me wait till I was an adult and could remember the pain to get a circumcision. I certainly don't resent them for doing it when I was a child.

Or you could of not resented them at all and seen no difference by not getting circumcised?

[Purlina]

I would have resented my parents if they made me wait till I was an adult and could remember the pain to get a circumcision. I certainly don't resent them for doing it when I was a child.

Or you could just not get it done?

[Dasffion]

It simply comes down to taking the choice away from a person who is helpless in the matter( a baby ). That must surely be wrong, I'm surprised not everyone thinks so. Regardless of the reason it's done, it is altering a person's body without that person's consent.

Then they grow up, and what if they mind? nothing can be done to change what has happened, they can't just grow a turtle-neck back.

A baby cannot speak up for itself and any parent who follow their own selfish interests and chose for their children, should be ashamed of themselves.

Do you know what a parents job is? It's to make choices for a child.

---------- Post added 2012-12-07 at 08:37 AM ----------

Or you could of not resented them at all and seen no difference by not getting circumcised?

Or you could just not get it done?

But I like being circumcised. If I know at this age what I know now and wasn't circumcised then I'd want it done, but now I'd have to deal with the memory of the pain and scaring.

[Purlina]

Do you know what a parents job is? It's to make choices for a child.

Choices that are in the best interest of the child.

[Dasffion]

Choices that are in the best interest of the child.

You're acting like circumcision is a completely pointless procedure with absolutely no benefits. That's far from the case. I'm going to circumcise my children because I feel it's in their best interest.

[Funt Case]

Do you know what a parents job is? It's to make choices for a child.

---------- Post added 2012-12-07 at 08:37 AM ----------





But I like being circumcised. If I know at this age what I know now and wasn't circumcised then I'd want it done, but now I'd have to deal with the memory of the pain and scaring.

Yeah you like it, but what if you didn't? the choice got took away from you at birth, that's the whole point.

Lets make up 2 guys, lets call them Ben and Fred.
Ben got circumcised at birth he's 20 now and doesn't like it.
And now lets talk about fred. Fred wasn't circumcised but now at 20, he feels he wants it done.

[Dasffion]

Yeah you like it, but what if you didn't? the choice got took away from you at birth, that's the whole point.

Lets make up 2 guys, lets call them Ben and Fred.
Ben got circumcised at birth he's 20 now and doesn't like it.
And now lets talk about fred. Fred wasn't circumcised but now at 20, he feels he wants it done.

People keep talking about Children resenting their parents and not liking their circumcision. Can anyone actually provide even 1 example of this occurring? I just don't buy it.

[DEATHETERNAL]

There are rules, we don't get to do whatever, threaten whoever, in the name of liberty. That's what this thread is, a discussion of those rules. "Fuck your rules, man" is a position, but it doesn't really add substantively to the debate, no matter how much you think "or I'm going to kill you" matters to anyone.

Actually one of the reasons for the Second Amendment was so that individuals could protect their own liberty from the government as well as others. So yes, I do get to threaten whoever when they want to violate my liberty or my child's liberty.

If you want your kid to be circumcised, you'll wait until they are old enough to decide for themselves and then ask them. Any half way decent parent would.

No, I won't and no they wouldn't.

[Deleted]

Both are genital mutilations performed at young age and against the subject's will, initially conceived to restrict sexuality and handed down through generations due to religious beliefs.
The fact that one of the two (the male one) is not as painful and is also performed at later age for therapeutic reasons is merely coincidental and, I believe, not the aim of this thread.

Not the aim of this thread, but neither are the outrageous claims that it would be comparable to female circumcision. But I guess that's the result of talking about something they have no idea of beyond personal feelings.

[Deleted]

People keep talking about Children resenting their parents and not liking their circumcision. Can anyone actually provide even 1 example of this occurring? I just don't buy it.

Yes, there are a few people in this thread unhappy with their circumcision.

[Lightfist]

ITT: People bicker about whether or not a flap of skin should be left alone based solely on whether or not they have said flap of skin. They will compare it to horrible acts of mutilation and child abuse and/or discuss the unquestionable health benefits. They will also talk about what women prefer.

OT: I'm circumcised. I don't really mind. I probably wouldn't have minded not being circumcised. I doubt it matters to most people enough to be an issue, but it should probably be a choice.

[Detheavn]

Any modification to a human being's body which is not required to save one's life should be done on a voluntary basis and not forced by either religion or family.