Non Jews and Circumcision - Question

[Anonymous]

Unless there is a medical reason (at birth) or religious belief, I recommend against it. Although more problematic and/or painful later in life, circumcision can be elected by the male if needed or desired. Children are NOT property and parents should NOT be the ones who change the body God/Nature has provided in their child-- unless imminent for health/quality of life. I was circumcised shortly after birth-- wish I had been left intact. There are pluses and minuses with respect to health, sexual pleasure and other factors-- but parents, PLEASE LET YOUR SON DECIDE-- not you.

[Anonymous]

White, non jew and our son was definitely circumcised. It is hard enough to get our son to wipe and wash hands after going to the bathroom. If not circumcised, you will be dealing with having to help him clean himself for a long time. And yes, I have seen the infections when not cleaned properly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:White, non jew and our son was definitely circumcised. It is hard enough to get our son to wipe and wash hands after going to the bathroom. If not circumcised, you will be dealing with having to help him clean himself for a long time. And yes, I have seen the infections when not cleaned properly.

Oh please. My 15 year old intact son has never once had a problem. And neither have my intact daughters, who also have folds, nooks, and crannies and also produce smegma as all normal mammals do. The "infection" dog won't hunt, because it's a complete myth.

[Anonymous]

I highly recommend it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White, non jew and our son was definitely circumcised. It is hard enough to get our son to wipe and wash hands after going to the bathroom. If not circumcised, you will be dealing with having to help him clean himself for a long time. And yes, I have seen the infections when not cleaned properly.

Oh please. My 15 year old intact son has never once had a problem. And neither have my intact daughters, who also have folds, nooks, and crannies and also produce smegma as all normal mammals do. The "infection" dog won't hunt, because it's a complete myth.

As a mom, not having grown up with a penis, I had no idea I was supposed to pull the skin back to clean my baby boy. I was really embarrassed when I went to the pediatrician and she discovered that the tip of my son's penis was red and swollen because of the smegma buildup that we hadn't been cleaning properly. As a preschooler, we regularly have problems with his penis getting red and sore (he will complain it hurts) when he doesn't clean properly. Pretty soon, he will be of an age when mom and dad can't help him. I'm glad it wasn't an issue for your son but it is for some kids.

[Anonymous]

My DH is intact and our sons are intact. No one in our family has an issue with their intact penis. My older son knows how to pull his skin back to clean his penis on his own. The younger one hasn't retracted his skin yet, so we clean it like a finger.

[Anonymous]

I have two girls but probably wouldn't circumcise if I had a boy. I mean, he was born with a natural foreskin, he should have it.


Just wondering if anyone with an intact son has seen this. I've looked after and changed the diapers of boys before but have never seen it. I would have worried if I had observed this in a son without coming across this site. http://www.drmomma.org/2011/06/ballooning-in-intact-child.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White, non jew and our son was definitely circumcised. It is hard enough to get our son to wipe and wash hands after going to the bathroom. If not circumcised, you will be dealing with having to help him clean himself for a long time. And yes, I have seen the infections when not cleaned properly.

Oh please. My 15 year old intact son has never once had a problem. And neither have my intact daughters, who also have folds, nooks, and crannies and also produce smegma as all normal mammals do. The "infection" dog won't hunt, because it's a complete myth.

As a mom, not having grown up with a penis, I had no idea I was supposed to pull the skin back to clean my baby boy. I was really embarrassed when I went to the pediatrician and she discovered that the tip of my son's penis was red and swollen because of the smegma buildup that we hadn't been cleaning properly. As a preschooler, we regularly have problems with his penis getting red and sore (he will complain it hurts) when he doesn't clean properly. Pretty soon, he will be of an age when mom and dad can't help him. I'm glad it wasn't an issue for your son but it is for some kids.

This is false information. You are not at all supposed to pull the foreskin back to clean it. Ever! The foreskin is fused to the glans of the penis in infancy by the synechia, aka the balanopreputial lamina, a membrane that fuses the two skin surfaces together. In infancy, there is literally no space for anything to accumulate under the foreskin because it is attached to the glans exactly like the fingernail is bonded to the nail bed.

Your pediatrician gave you outdated information that could in all likelihood have led to or be leading to damage to your son's penis if you are still following the advice to retract and clean. Premature and forced retraction can cause tearing, bleeding, and scarring as you prematurely separate the foreskin from the glans. The AAP says don't do it.

https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/baby/bathing-skin-care/Pages/Care-for-an-Uncircumcised-Penis.aspx

http://arlingtonpediatrics.com/files/2014/07/Care-of-the-Uncircumcised-Penis.pdf

Soap is also highly irritating to mucous membranes, and should never be used on the inside of the foreskin any more than it should be used on the inside of the vagina or labia.

[Anonymous]

Son is circumcised and even I knew that! ^^^

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unless there is a medical reason (at birth) or religious belief, I recommend against it. Although more problematic and/or painful later in life, circumcision can be elected by the male if needed or desired. Children are NOT property and parents should NOT be the ones who change the body God/Nature has provided in their child-- unless imminent for health/quality of life. I was circumcised shortly after birth-- wish I had been left intact. There are pluses and minuses with respect to health, sexual pleasure and other factors-- but parents, PLEASE LET YOUR SON DECIDE-- not you.

Why does this make it okay?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have two girls but probably wouldn't circumcise if I had a boy. I mean, he was born with a natural foreskin, he should have it.


Just wondering if anyone with an intact son has seen this. I've looked after and changed the diapers of boys before but have never seen it. I would have worried if I had observed this in a son without coming across this site. http://www.drmomma.org/2011/06/ballooning-in-intact-child.html

Thanks! That’s pretty cool! I have an intact toddler and didn’t know about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless there is a medical reason (at birth) or religious belief, I recommend against it. Although more problematic and/or painful later in life, circumcision can be elected by the male if needed or desired. Children are NOT property and parents should NOT be the ones who change the body God/Nature has provided in their child-- unless imminent for health/quality of life. I was circumcised shortly after birth-- wish I had been left intact. There are pluses and minuses with respect to health, sexual pleasure and other factors-- but parents, PLEASE LET YOUR SON DECIDE-- not you.

Why does this make it okay?

Because beliefs about God are important to human culture? Geez, I didn’t circumcise our son, but please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless there is a medical reason (at birth) or religious belief, I recommend against it. Although more problematic and/or painful later in life, circumcision can be elected by the male if needed or desired. Children are NOT property and parents should NOT be the ones who change the body God/Nature has provided in their child-- unless imminent for health/quality of life. I was circumcised shortly after birth-- wish I had been left intact. There are pluses and minuses with respect to health, sexual pleasure and other factors-- but parents, PLEASE LET YOUR SON DECIDE-- not you.

Why does this make it okay?

Because beliefs about God are important to human culture? Geez, I didn’t circumcise our son, but please.

So you're cool with families that circumcise their daughters because it's part of their religious beliefs? Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. It can't be OK to circumcise one gender because religion without also being OK to circumcise the other because religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never dated a man who wished he was circumcised, but have dated men who wished that they weren't.

Opposite experience for me.

They could have taken care of that issue if they really wished that were true. Obviously it wasn't something they felt strongly about.

That's what I don't get about the pro-circ people. If you are so certain circumcision is the best path, why aren't you confident enough in your stance to let your son decide on his own as an adult? Why not put him in charge of his own body? Are you worried because adult voluntary circumcisions are almost non-existent? And don't talk about how much worse it is; after all, you're totally okay doing this to your infant. Surely an adult male can handle what a baby often suffers without anesthesia.

The procedure is substantially more serious for an adult than it is for an infant and you know it. Adults and older children require stitches and a much longer recovery period. Infants do not require stitches and they heal much faster. It was healed in a week for my boys.

Boo hoo, stitches!!! Pity the poor penis! Women are popping kids out of their vaginas, getting c-sections, and are stitched up regularly. If an intact man cared enough, they’d do it.

The man has to be under anesthesia for almost an hour, there are hundreds of stitches and the penis swells up 3-4 times it’s size. It’s not something that comes without risk.
Man I know had to have it done as the foreskin wasn’t retracting even at age 19.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never dated a man who wished he was circumcised, but have dated men who wished that they weren't.

Opposite experience for me.

They could have taken care of that issue if they really wished that were true. Obviously it wasn't something they felt strongly about.

That's what I don't get about the pro-circ people. If you are so certain circumcision is the best path, why aren't you confident enough in your stance to let your son decide on his own as an adult? Why not put him in charge of his own body? Are you worried because adult voluntary circumcisions are almost non-existent? And don't talk about how much worse it is; after all, you're totally okay doing this to your infant. Surely an adult male can handle what a baby often suffers without anesthesia.

The procedure is substantially more serious for an adult than it is for an infant and you know it. Adults and older children require stitches and a much longer recovery period. Infants do not require stitches and they heal much faster. It was healed in a week for my boys.

Boo hoo, stitches!!! Pity the poor penis! Women are popping kids out of their vaginas, getting c-sections, and are stitched up regularly. If an intact man cared enough, they’d do it.

The man has to be under anesthesia for almost an hour, there are hundreds of stitches and the penis swells up 3-4 times it’s size. It’s not something that comes without risk.
Man I know had to have it done as the foreskin wasn’t retracting even at age 19.

That being said, I’m not sure what I would decide with any future sons. I would decide with my partner.