Boy moms, you happy with your choice?

[Anonymous]

13 year old boy. Happy we did not circumcise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not American and never considered circumcising my boys.

Same. I think that a lot of Americans don't realize how out of the norm this practice is compared with other countries.

Why would this matter to us?

It might help to, you know, step outside of yourself and get out from behind the teeny tiny lens so many Americans see the world through.

I’ve lived a good chunk of my life overseas. But you didn’t answer my question. Should a European’s view of circumcision change because of what Americans think?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a surgeon. In med school when I saw the procedure being done, I vowed I not only never, ever do that to my boys, not participate in it indirectly.

Circumcision is male genital mutilation. It is interesting that we in the US criticize other cultures for female genital mutilation and we do it ourselves to our boys.

The research has not played out to show a benefit to doing this at a population level. If a man engages in high risk sexual behaviors where the procedure might be beneficial, he could get the procedure himself at his own decision. I will support my sons in this regard if needed.

Liar. Study after international study shows substantial benefit from being circumcised. The CDC was forced by the religious right to claim there was no benefit while at the same time presenting a lot of evidence that circumcising improves quality of life. Why make your adolescent child have the procedure painfully when it could have been done when he was an infant? (A real surgeon would not have been disgusted by a very minor procedure.)

I thought religious ppl would want the CDC to claim there were benefits??

Yeah, DP, that bolded line made no sense to me either.

[Anonymous]

I have a 5 year old. He's circumcised. I let dad decide, he's had no issues and it isn't something I think about at all unless I see a thread like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a surgeon. In med school when I saw the procedure being done, I vowed I not only never, ever do that to my boys, not participate in it indirectly.

Circumcision is male genital mutilation. It is interesting that we in the US criticize other cultures for female genital mutilation and we do it ourselves to our boys.

The research has not played out to show a benefit to doing this at a population level. If a man engages in high risk sexual behaviors where the procedure might be beneficial, he could get the procedure himself at his own decision. I will support my sons in this regard if needed.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe current rate in the US is close 50/50.

So while boomer parents cannot fathom choosing not to circumcise, and most of the children were circumcised, the US is a different place now. Lots of people are making more educated choses about healthcare vs the old thinking of "it looks funny/gross" if you don't circumcise. Plus more immigration. The 1970s-90s practice norms are dying. So while you personally may think it looks weird or girls won't like it, or some of the other dumb reasons since it was the norm in your generation- that will not the experience and opinions of the next generation of teens that are now young children.

Yeah this is the key point. We're a few generations out from the cultural practice dying out. Rates are dropping rapidly and soon it won't be "normal vs. weird" or "like dad" since half of dads will be uncircumcised in another 20-30 years. At some point it will become enough of a minority that there will be a cultural tipping point and it will shift to "weird" to be circumcised. I have my own opinions but don't have a dog in this fight, except that I have 6 nephews in different parts of the country and none are circumcised. I just hope the strongly opinionated moms here don't turn into mean, judgmental grandma/MILs when their grown kids decide not to circumcise their own kids.

[Anonymous]

Yes.

(Either is fine and I fully support letting the male parent choose if there is one.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe current rate in the US is close 50/50.

So while boomer parents cannot fathom choosing not to circumcise, and most of the children were circumcised, the US is a different place now. Lots of people are making more educated choses about healthcare vs the old thinking of "it looks funny/gross" if you don't circumcise. Plus more immigration. The 1970s-90s practice norms are dying. So while you personally may think it looks weird or girls won't like it, or some of the other dumb reasons since it was the norm in your generation- that will not the experience and opinions of the next generation of teens that are now young children.

Yeah this is the key point. We're a few generations out from the cultural practice dying out. Rates are dropping rapidly and soon it won't be "normal vs. weird" or "like dad" since half of dads will be uncircumcised in another 20-30 years. At some point it will become enough of a minority that there will be a cultural tipping point and it will shift to "weird" to be circumcised. I have my own opinions but don't have a dog in this fight, except that I have 6 nephews in different parts of the country and none are circumcised. I just hope the strongly opinionated moms here don't turn into mean, judgmental grandma/MILs when their grown kids decide not to circumcise their own kids.

Good news: adult kids no longer care what their parents/inlaws think. Another good trend, family isnt all that important just because they are related to. Adults kids have no problem limiting contact with toxic parents now. It is much more acceptable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe current rate in the US is close 50/50.

So while boomer parents cannot fathom choosing not to circumcise, and most of the children were circumcised, the US is a different place now. Lots of people are making more educated choses about healthcare vs the old thinking of "it looks funny/gross" if you don't circumcise. Plus more immigration. The 1970s-90s practice norms are dying. So while you personally may think it looks weird or girls won't like it, or some of the other dumb reasons since it was the norm in your generation- that will not the experience and opinions of the next generation of teens that are now young children.

Yeah this is the key point. We're a few generations out from the cultural practice dying out. Rates are dropping rapidly and soon it won't be "normal vs. weird" or "like dad" since half of dads will be uncircumcised in another 20-30 years. At some point it will become enough of a minority that there will be a cultural tipping point and it will shift to "weird" to be circumcised. I have my own opinions but don't have a dog in this fight, except that I have 6 nephews in different parts of the country and none are circumcised. I just hope the strongly opinionated moms here don't turn into mean, judgmental grandma/MILs when their grown kids decide not to circumcise their own kids.

I actually think the opposite. The evidence that there is a benefit is becoming clearer and I think it will remain more like a 50/50 thing. And nothing will be considered 'weird' in a generation or two but it will be more commonly accepted because I think this generation of men will have what others did not which is adequate representation of both experience and it will be clear that for the vast majority of men either choice is fine but there will be fringe cases on both sides that have horor stories and it will just settle out to being a non issue in a few decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a surgeon. In med school when I saw the procedure being done, I vowed I not only never, ever do that to my boys, not participate in it indirectly.

Circumcision is male genital mutilation. It is interesting that we in the US criticize other cultures for female genital mutilation and we do it ourselves to our boys.

The research has not played out to show a benefit to doing this at a population level. If a man engages in high risk sexual behaviors where the procedure might be beneficial, he could get the procedure himself at his own decision. I will support my sons in this regard if needed.

Liar. Study after international study shows substantial benefit from being circumcised. The CDC was forced by the religious right to claim there was no benefit while at the same time presenting a lot of evidence that circumcising improves quality of life. Why make your adolescent child have the procedure painfully when it could have been done when he was an infant? (A real surgeon would not have been disgusted by a very minor procedure.)

Female mutilation is to keep girls chaste and ensure modesty enforced by the male society. The form of Female mutilation you are comparing to circumcision is cutting off a female's clitoris. This is means she will never have enjoyment sensation out of sex. Circumcision does not affect this for men. NOT a good comparison so stop making it.

[Anonymous]

I'm fine with the choice I made. I don't think I'll ever know whether or not it was the right choice for my child because I can't imagine a scenario where he would vocalize to me that he had a problem with the aesthetics of his penis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a surgeon. In med school when I saw the procedure being done, I vowed I not only never, ever do that to my boys, not participate in it indirectly.

Circumcision is male genital mutilation. It is interesting that we in the US criticize other cultures for female genital mutilation and we do it ourselves to our boys.

The research has not played out to show a benefit to doing this at a population level. If a man engages in high risk sexual behaviors where the procedure might be beneficial, he could get the procedure himself at his own decision. I will support my sons in this regard if needed.

Liar. Study after international study shows substantial benefit from being circumcised. The CDC was forced by the religious right to claim there was no benefit while at the same time presenting a lot of evidence that circumcising improves quality of life. Why make your adolescent child have the procedure painfully when it could have been done when he was an infant? (A real surgeon would not have been disgusted by a very minor procedure.)

I thought religious ppl would want the CDC to claim there were benefits??

Yeah, DP, that bolded line made no sense to me either.

In this case, I think that "religious right" means "Christian right". Obviously, religious Jews and Muslims are pro-circumcision. The Bible Belt is so dense in this country, many people cannot fathom that every person on earth is not a conservative Christian. To them, a religious rite that is not their own should be forbidden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a surgeon. In med school when I saw the procedure being done, I vowed I not only never, ever do that to my boys, not participate in it indirectly.

Circumcision is male genital mutilation. It is interesting that we in the US criticize other cultures for female genital mutilation and we do it ourselves to our boys.

The research has not played out to show a benefit to doing this at a population level. If a man engages in high risk sexual behaviors where the procedure might be beneficial, he could get the procedure himself at his own decision. I will support my sons in this regard if needed.

Female mutilation is to keep girls chaste and ensure modesty enforced by the male society. The form of Female mutilation you are comparing to circumcision is cutting off a female's clitoris. This is means she will never have enjoyment sensation out of sex. Circumcision does not affect this for men. NOT a good comparison so stop making it.

This. The "surgeon" doesn't seem to understand that the male equivalent of female mutilation is castration. Circumcision is not castration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe current rate in the US is close 50/50.

So while boomer parents cannot fathom choosing not to circumcise, and most of the children were circumcised, the US is a different place now. Lots of people are making more educated choses about healthcare vs the old thinking of "it looks funny/gross" if you don't circumcise. Plus more immigration. The 1970s-90s practice norms are dying. So while you personally may think it looks weird or girls won't like it, or some of the other dumb reasons since it was the norm in your generation- that will not the experience and opinions of the next generation of teens that are now young children.

I am a boomer parent and my adult sons are intact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes.

(Either is fine and I fully support letting the male parent choose if there is one.)

Why?