Honestly, why don't people circumcise their sons in D.C.?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignorance, people really need to look at the recent medical findings, it's not just cosmetic and cultural.

Yes it is. That is really absolutely all it is. With the rare exception of a few medically necessary cases, yes. That. Is. All. It. Is. Wake up US, take a look at the rest of the modern world...you are alone in your craze to circumcise every boy born in this country...

US is more modern, you should say wake up world look at the medical facts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn't only because my husband wasn't circumcised and I felt my son should be the same as his father. Sorry if that offends you op.

Usually the anti-circ side accuses the circ-supporters of doing circumcision for familial conformity. Interesting turn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I can say is I wouldn't do it with an adult male with an uncircumsized one. They are nasty! They look freakish to me.

And it is people like you who cause thousands of baby boys to have their penises mutilated without ever being asked if they want it or not.

It is more than sad, that an entire society can fall under the sick belief that a mutilated penis is somehow prettier than a healthy, natural, intact one. Sad. Incredibly sad.

NP here. I'm not sad. My husband isn't sad. My sons aren't sad. Be sad for people who have actual bad things happen to them, not this.

It really doesn't matter either way.

If you don't think the act of a "successful circ" isn't a bad thing, some boys do have actual bad things happen to them from circs. It's true. Really. Some more "bad" then others. For some it just isn't worth the risk. And I'm not a crazy hippie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I can say is I wouldn't do it with an adult male with an uncircumsized one. They are nasty! They look freakish to me.

And it is people like you who cause thousands of baby boys to have their penises mutilated without ever being asked if they want it or not.

It is more than sad, that an entire society can fall under the sick belief that a mutilated penis is somehow prettier than a healthy, natural, intact one. Sad. Incredibly sad.

NP here. I'm not sad. My husband isn't sad. My sons aren't sad. Be sad for people who have actual bad things happen to them, not this.

It really doesn't matter either way.

If you don't think the act of a "successful circ" isn't a bad thing, some boys do have actual bad things happen to them from circs. It's true. Really. Some more "bad" then others. For some it just isn't worth the risk. And I'm not a crazy hippie.

Right, you weigh the risks. All the doctors we talked to (some personally, some professionally) believed that the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks. We did too. Some uncircumcised men develop serious enough problems that they require adult circumcisions, which are universally understood to be harder on the patient. That's a rare but real risk, too. "Really."

For most men it does not matter either way, so demonizing people who choose to do it is pretty ridiculous. They aren't circumcising you or your baby.

[Anonymous]

I bet everyone in this demographic does: rich, upper-crust, NWDC, elite private school, members of CCC /Met Club/Sulgrave etc...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because it is sick and perverse and inhumane and abusive to cut off part of any non-consenting human being's genitals, especially those of an infant child.

Can't say it any clearer than that.

Ahahahahaha. You do realize you have just offended all the Jewish and Muslim people, right?

You know, I kind of agree with the PP you quoted. I don't think it's ever OK to cut into anyone's genitals without their knowledge, understanding, and consent. Regardless of religion. Most Jews and Muslims I know pick and choose the rules they wish to follow. Why should this be any different?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I can say is I wouldn't do it with an adult male with an uncircumsized one. They are nasty! They look freakish to me.

And it is people like you who cause thousands of baby boys to have their penises mutilated without ever being asked if they want it or not.

It is more than sad, that an entire society can fall under the sick belief that a mutilated penis is somehow prettier than a healthy, natural, intact one. Sad. Incredibly sad.

NP here. I'm not sad. My husband isn't sad. My sons aren't sad. Be sad for people who have actual bad things happen to them, not this.

It really doesn't matter either way.

Cutting of a piece of a baby boys penis for aesthetic reasons IS an 'actual bad thing' - sorry that you don't feel that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Perhaps because there are a lot of international families here, OP.

We're in Bethesda, come from Europe and know a lot of highly educated, well-off foreign families. None of us would have dreamed of "mutilating" our sons, since this is not a culturally accepted practice where we come from. We know American families who don't do this either.

I am also a scientist and can tell you that the jury is still out on whether circumcision really does confer lasting medical benefits.

And as for your "esthetics"... Can I give you an eye-roll?
That remark really makes you come across as ridiculously provincial and narrow-minded, OP.

You are not a very good scientist or are in a different field because the overwhelming amount of research indicates a medical benefit. The United States also spends $100s of millions to provide circumcisions to 3rd world countries, which is ironic considering what people think here.

Have you ever read the studies? It was circ'ed Muslim men with normal sexual contact with wives and uncirc'ed men visiting prostitutes. Totally skewed and fully backed by GW Bush. That alone should have you guys and gals questioning the validity of the study. Lil' George was sending money to Africa, using bad science, to cut the tips off dicks instead of teaching them to use condoms and that sex with infants doesn't cure AIDS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I can say is I wouldn't do it with an adult male with an uncircumsized one. They are nasty! They look freakish to me.

And it is people like you who cause thousands of baby boys to have their penises mutilated without ever being asked if they want it or not.

It is more than sad, that an entire society can fall under the sick belief that a mutilated penis is somehow prettier than a healthy, natural, intact one. Sad. Incredibly sad.

NP here. I'm not sad. My husband isn't sad. My sons aren't sad. Be sad for people who have actual bad things happen to them, not this.

It really doesn't matter either way.

Cutting of a piece of a baby boys penis for aesthetic reasons IS an 'actual bad thing' - sorry that you don't feel that way.

That's okay! Sorry you don't have better judgment and perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Perhaps because there are a lot of international families here, OP.

We're in Bethesda, come from Europe and know a lot of highly educated, well-off foreign families. None of us would have dreamed of "mutilating" our sons, since this is not a culturally accepted practice where we come from. We know American families who don't do this either.

I am also a scientist and can tell you that the jury is still out on whether circumcision really does confer lasting medical benefits.

And as for your "esthetics"... Can I give you an eye-roll?
That remark really makes you come across as ridiculously provincial and narrow-minded, OP.

You are not a very good scientist or are in a different field because the overwhelming amount of research indicates a medical benefit. The United States also spends $100s of millions to provide circumcisions to 3rd world countries, which is ironic considering what people think here.

Have you ever read the studies? It was circ'ed Muslim men with normal sexual contact with wives and uncirc'ed men visiting prostitutes. Totally skewed and fully backed by GW Bush. That alone should have you guys and gals questioning the validity of the study. Lil' George was sending money to Africa, using bad science, to cut the tips off dicks instead of teaching them to use condoms and that sex with infants doesn't cure AIDS.

Circumcision doesn't cut off the tip, it's skin.

If it's so bad and from bush why did Obama increase funding on a fake thing from bad science? Ohh, cause medically it's real both for health reasons and std prevention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignorance, people really need to look at the recent medical findings, it's not just cosmetic and cultural.

Yes it is. That is really absolutely all it is. With the rare exception of a few medically necessary cases, yes. That. Is. All. It. Is. Wake up US, take a look at the rest of the modern world...you are alone in your craze to circumcise every boy born in this country...

US is more modern, you should say wake up world look at the medical facts

Those dirty, diseased Swedes!

[Anonymous]

NP. American with a circ'd husband. We decided not to circ our son based on advice of our doctor, pediatrician and friends who are doctors & pediatricians. We just couldn't justify it given the lack of evidence that it provided any strong medical benefits. Other friends of ours have made the same decision.

[Anonymous]

Most people either don't care or prefer circumcised , no one really complains about a circd but quite a few complain on an uncircd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. American with a circ'd husband. We decided not to circ our son based on advice of our doctor, pediatrician and friends who are doctors & pediatricians. We just couldn't justify it given the lack of evidence that it provided any strong medical benefits. Other friends of ours have made the same decision.

Yah it's confusing, the medical recommendations recently changed to favor circumcision and doctors have stated to adopt the new findings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I can say is I wouldn't do it with an adult male with an uncircumsized one. They are nasty! They look freakish to me.

And it is people like you who cause thousands of baby boys to have their penises mutilated without ever being asked if they want it or not.

It is more than sad, that an entire society can fall under the sick belief that a mutilated penis is somehow prettier than a healthy, natural, intact one. Sad. Incredibly sad.

NP here. I'm not sad. My husband isn't sad. My sons aren't sad. Be sad for people who have actual bad things happen to them, not this.

It really doesn't matter either way.

Cutting of a piece of a baby boys penis for aesthetic reasons IS an 'actual bad thing' - sorry that you don't feel that way.

That's okay! Sorry you don't have better judgment and perspective.

NP here, but you are the one that has poor judgment and a lack of perspective. The only consolation you have is that in time you will realize that you are wrong. This is certain. And sadly, then it will be too late for your son/s.