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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is just pure ignorance. Please go and look up what the foreskin is and what it does. if it's just "skin" then why are you not in favor of cutting off women's clitoral hoods? It's the same thing. Or some other skin, for cosmetic reasons. The foreskin is just "skin" in much the same way as your eyelids are "just skin".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Time has actually proven the opposite, circumcision had been proven to have medical benefits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is not true. You are clearly confused, but you are wrong. Please don't go spouting out misinformation like this, it's very irresponsible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is just pure ignorance. Please go and look up what the foreskin is and what it does. if it's just "skin" then why are you not in favor of cutting off women's clitoral hoods? It's the same thing. Or some other skin, for cosmetic reasons. The foreskin is just "skin" in much the same way as your eyelids are "just skin".

Hahahaha, you are funny. Completely different found, go back to vaccination autism scares, 911 conspiracy hoaxes and big foot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Time has actually proven the opposite, circumcision had been proven to have medical benefits.

You are wrong. Circumcision has been going on for thousands of years, and yet there STILL are no proven medical benefits that cannot be better addressed in other ways. (E.g. wearing a condom or treating a UTI in the same way as you treat them in girls).

As someone who grew up overseas and will NEVER understand this American obsession with genital mutilation, I can only tell you that you sound BATSHIT CRAZY when you try and come up with lame justifications for your perverse insistence in cosmetically altering your non-consenting infant child's genitalia. Please, take a step back and look at what you are saying. Why would you perform unnecessary cosmetic surgery on a newborn's genitals, of all things? They are born perfect and no, a scarred stubby penis does not look good, nor does it function as well. This is a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is not true. You are clearly confused, but you are wrong. Please don't go spouting out misinformation like this, it's very irresponsible.

In 2012 The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Get outraged about something more outrageous, like people who don't vaccinate. If my sons grow up to be one of the very very rare men who mourns his missing foreskin and holds it against me, I will have done something wrong as a parent but it won't have been the circumcision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is just pure ignorance. Please go and look up what the foreskin is and what it does. if it's just "skin" then why are you not in favor of cutting off women's clitoral hoods? It's the same thing. Or some other skin, for cosmetic reasons. The foreskin is just "skin" in much the same way as your eyelids are "just skin".

Hahahaha, you are funny. Completely different found, go back to vaccination autism scares, 911 conspiracy hoaxes and big foot

Funny? What exactly do you disagree with? Do you understand the function and purpose of the foreskin? Do you understand that it protects the glans (and a whole lot more), just like your eyelids protect your eyes? Do you understand that it is the "prepuce"? Do you know what the equivalent is in women?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Get outraged about something more outrageous, like people who don't vaccinate. If my sons grow up to be one of the very very rare men who mourns his missing foreskin and holds it against me, I will have done something wrong as a parent but it won't have been the circumcision.

Go on and justify it to yourself if it makes you feel better. But know that you are sick and perverse and abusive. It is disgusting what you have done to your children. Horrific. Why not leave them just as perfect as they were born.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Time has actually proven the opposite, circumcision had been proven to have medical benefits.

You are wrong. Circumcision has been going on for thousands of years, and yet there STILL are no proven medical benefits that cannot be better addressed in other ways. (E.g. wearing a condom or treating a UTI in the same way as you treat them in girls).

As someone who grew up overseas and will NEVER understand this American obsession with genital mutilation, I can only tell you that you sound BATSHIT CRAZY when you try and come up with lame justifications for your perverse insistence in cosmetically altering your non-consenting infant child's genitalia. Please, take a step back and look at what you are saying. Why would you perform unnecessary cosmetic surgery on a newborn's genitals, of all things? They are born perfect and no, a scarred stubby penis does not look good, nor does it function as well. This is a fact.

Let's be honest, your post speaks for itself and everyone can conclude you sound bat shit crazy. If you want people to take you seriously you need to act less insane. You are doing a disservice to your cause movement or whatever thing you are pushing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is not true. You are clearly confused, but you are wrong. Please don't go spouting out misinformation like this, it's very irresponsible.

In 2012 The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks

Yawn. Go read it again. And read the research too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Time has actually proven the opposite, circumcision had been proven to have medical benefits.

You are wrong. Circumcision has been going on for thousands of years, and yet there STILL are no proven medical benefits that cannot be better addressed in other ways. (E.g. wearing a condom or treating a UTI in the same way as you treat them in girls).

As someone who grew up overseas and will NEVER understand this American obsession with genital mutilation, I can only tell you that you sound BATSHIT CRAZY when you try and come up with lame justifications for your perverse insistence in cosmetically altering your non-consenting infant child's genitalia. Please, take a step back and look at what you are saying. Why would you perform unnecessary cosmetic surgery on a newborn's genitals, of all things? They are born perfect and no, a scarred stubby penis does not look good, nor does it function as well. This is a fact.

Let's be honest, your post speaks for itself and everyone can conclude you sound bat shit crazy. If you want people to take you seriously you need to act less insane. You are doing a disservice to your cause movement or whatever thing you are pushing.

You are so wrapped up in your culture that you can't see the wood for the trees. There is nothing insane about saying that mutilating a newborn baby's genitalia is wrong. If you disagree please say so, I want to hear you say, "yes, I believe that it is acceptable to mutilate a non-consenting new born baby's genitals." Go ahead and tell me why and how you justify that.

[Anonymous]

Judging from the above unhinged posts it proves that the anticirc movement is quite nuts. BTW, whether you circ or not it doesn't really matter to someone who circs, we just don't go all up in your business screaming that you did something wrong and destroyed lives. God damn, calm down and do something else with your life like read a book or jog a mile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, why do you care about other people's penises in D.C?

She's down w/OPP.

For the win, LOL!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is not true. You are clearly confused, but you are wrong. Please don't go spouting out misinformation like this, it's very irresponsible.

In 2012 The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks

That isn't saying they recommend circ. In fact, they go on to say that the benefits aren't high enough to recommend universal circumision. All that is saying is that the benefits to doing it outweigh the risks of the procedure. So the benefit of STD protection is greater than the chance a child would die or be significant injured during the procedure.