Any Jews having a tough time with circumcision?

[Anonymous]

Eh, I don't agree.

Anonymous wrote:If you plan to raise him as a Jew, then it is a religious requirement. Case closed, for us.

[Anonymous]

I am real enough, and I am Jewish, and would not circumcise. It's not a popular decision but more and more of us are making it.

Anonymous wrote:Not at all. We did it and have no regrets. The only comments I ever see are those online. No one in real life has asked or cared.

[Anonymous]

Both DH and I are Jewish. I told him he had to decide. He talked to his doctor, also Jewish, and opted not to.

I don't give a flying fig if the orthodox police don't think DS is Jewish enough.

[Anonymous]

My Jewish SIL had her son's foreskin "notched." I don't know what this means exactly but from her talking about it, I gathered it was a ceremonial cut that fulfilled the religious requirements without removing most (or any?) of the foreskin. It was done by a rabbi but that's all I know. Perhaps Google or talk to a moil or Jewish friend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am Jewish with daughters so not confronting this issue right now, but I think the hysteria over male circumcision is ridiculous. I have zero issue with male circumcision and there is compelling evidence that it actually protects men from HIV infection, among other benefits.

I read these absurd postings on this forum comparing the removal of the foreskin to female circumcision where commonly the labia and clitoris are removed and, in some cases, the vaginal opening sewn together. A grotesque and completely absurd comparison. Like comparing removal of a mole to an amputation.

Agree. Lots of fake hype on dcum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Jewish with daughters so not confronting this issue right now, but I think the hysteria over male circumcision is ridiculous. I have zero issue with male circumcision and there is compelling evidence that it actually protects men from HIV infection, among other benefits.

I read these absurd postings on this forum comparing the removal of the foreskin to female circumcision where commonly the labia and clitoris are removed and, in some cases, the vaginal opening sewn together. A grotesque and completely absurd comparison. Like comparing removal of a mole to an amputation.

Agree. Lots of fake hype on dcum.

Sigh. Read this: http://www.mndaily.com/2010/09/20/cut-divides (as just one example). In many cases female circumcision is much less invasive and damaging than male circumcision and it is justified on exactly the same grounds. Please read up on it and you will understand why it is a reasonable comparison. Both are culturally driven. Both have no real justification or medical reasoning. Both are designed to curtail sexuality. Both are thought to be "cleaner". However in ALL cases the penis is damaged irreversibly. In some cases with female circumcision there is no permanent damage.

[Anonymous]

Doesn't a Rabbi actually remove less of the foreskin in a bris than a hospital would? I read that somewhere. That Rabbis only snip the tip of the foreskin, whereas the hospital is, um, more thorough in removing all of it.

Does anyone know if that's true?

[Anonymous]

We did it twice. I did have some misgivings, but DH felt strongly about a brisk. Both times we went back to the hospital on the 8th day and had a religiously-valid bris with a doctor doing the cutting (actually, DH did the primary cut).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Jewish with daughters so not confronting this issue right now, but I think the hysteria over male circumcision is ridiculous. I have zero issue with male circumcision and there is compelling evidence that it actually protects men from HIV infection, among other benefits.

I read these absurd postings on this forum comparing the removal of the foreskin to female circumcision where commonly the labia and clitoris are removed and, in some cases, the vaginal opening sewn together. A grotesque and completely absurd comparison. Like comparing removal of a mole to an amputation.

Agree. Lots of fake hype on dcum.

Sigh. Read this: http://www.mndaily.com/2010/09/20/cut-divides (as just one example). In many cases female circumcision is much less invasive and damaging than male circumcision and it is justified on exactly the same grounds. Please read up on it and you will understand why it is a reasonable comparison. Both are culturally driven. Both have no real justification or medical reasoning. Both are designed to curtail sexuality. Both are thought to be "cleaner". However in ALL cases the penis is damaged irreversibly. In some cases with female circumcision there is no permanent damage.

Aid worker here and you have no idea what you're talking about. Female circumcision causes permanent damage and grossly disfigures the vulva. Moreover, the primary motivation is not just cleanliness, it's to repress sexual arousal. When you've actually met and worked with women and girls who are recovering from female circumcision - or female genital mutilation - then come back to me and tell me how it compares to removal of the foreskin of the penis. You are ignorant and trivializing FGM. Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Evidence is that circumcision protects against STDs. Of course, the anti-circ lunatics will deny it (but they tend to avoid facts and embrace hysteria, anyway)

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-03-25-circumcision-std_N.htm

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29882368/ns/health-sexual_health/t/male-circumcision-may-reduce-some-std-risks/

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/103/3/686.full

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Jewish with daughters so not confronting this issue right now, but I think the hysteria over male circumcision is ridiculous. I have zero issue with male circumcision and there is compelling evidence that it actually protects men from HIV infection, among other benefits.

I read these absurd postings on this forum comparing the removal of the foreskin to female circumcision where commonly the labia and clitoris are removed and, in some cases, the vaginal opening sewn together. A grotesque and completely absurd comparison. Like comparing removal of a mole to an amputation.

Agree. Lots of fake hype on dcum.

Sigh. Read this: http://www.mndaily.com/2010/09/20/cut-divides (as just one example). In many cases female circumcision is much less invasive and damaging than male circumcision and it is justified on exactly the same grounds. Please read up on it and you will understand why it is a reasonable comparison. Both are culturally driven. Both have no real justification or medical reasoning. Both are designed to curtail sexuality. Both are thought to be "cleaner". However in ALL cases the penis is damaged irreversibly. In some cases with female circumcision there is no permanent damage.

Once you put down your crack pipe, why don't YOU read up on it - you sound pathetically, willfully ignorant. Below, a link that documents the variety of FGM and how it in NO way compares to simple removal of the foreskin in a majority of cases. Are you delusional? Wait, don't answer that. Better yet, why not google some images of circumcized vuvlvas, labias, and stitched together vaginas and then come back and talk about how it's reversable and doesn't cause permanent damage. If you don't want to circumcize your son, fine. But to compare it to FGM is disgusting.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

[Anonymous]

I don't think anyone is trivializing female genital mutilation. It's just that we believe that circumcision is equally bad. I believe history will bear this out, in 100 years time we will look back with sadness on this barbaric practice. I have three Jewish friends who chose not to circumcise. I really laud them for this. They're observant Jews but just felt that it's not right, religiously mandated or not.

[Anonymous]

Do those who support female genital mutilation make similar arguments -- that it is no big deal, that it is culturally required or traditional, that it has health benefits, that it doesn't negatively impact sexual function etc.? I am curious.

[Anonymous]

Back to the topic at hand, I'm Jewish, the grandchild of holocaust survivors, and we (me and my circumsized husband) decided not to circumsize. No regrets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not at all. We did it and have no regrets. The only comments I ever see are those online. No one in real life has asked or cared.

I have never experienced the hostility towards circumcision expressed on these postings in real life. I had no idea it was so controversial until I started reading these posts.