Any Jews having a tough time with circumcision?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

People feel strongly about it. I wouldn't get in my friends' faces about their choices, because I'm not a confrontational person, but when I hear people say they are going to circ, or if I change a diaper of a friend's kid and realize they've circumcised, I have to admit that I definitely think less of them for it. But, my own decision was not easy to come to, and we nearly circ'd, and ultimately we decided not to because my brother's kid had a major infection and huge problems with his circ just before our kid was born, or otherwise we might have decided a different way. So I do try to tamp down the initial judgy feeling that comes up as I think it's easy to make the mistake of doing it, especially as it was for such a long time just the cultural norm, that nobody ever second-guessed. And, for a long time, people weren't even really aware of the risks and even said it wasn't painful to the baby. But, if I know you circ'd your baby, I think you made a mistake and didn't educate yourself and your kid suffered for it. I'm sure that will earn me flames, and Im sure many people will say who cares, and that's fine. But to those of you saying you never encounter this in real life, it doesn't mean people aren't silently thinking it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

you do realize that jews have been doing this for thousands of years, right?

anyway. DH and i are both jewish, and we did it, without regret.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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?

Our mohel left a lot of foreskin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Aids worker, when you have read up on and fully understand the different types of female circumcision then come back here and apologize to me for your ignorance. And, yes, male circumcision is also carried out for the same puritanical reasons. Look up the history.

[jindc]

Why is this discussion going on in 3 or 4 different threads? the end result is always the same - some people choose to do it, others don't. It's really none of anyone's business, for the most part. I'm sure the anti-people are as much about all the other issues facing OTHER people's families.

I just don't understand why this happens here time and time again with the same lack-of-respectful resolution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Yes, they do. I don't have time to find it right now, but the reason I was convinced of this was because I read a discussion like this one but from women in a culture that supported female circumcision. It was in English and sounded exactly like the conversations on DCUM about male circumcision. The arguments were exactly the same, including the, "my baby didn't even cry" etc etc. I'll see if I can find it and post it later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Aids worker, when you have read up on and fully understand the different types of female circumcision then come back here and apologize to me for your ignorance. And, yes, male circumcision is also carried out for the same puritanical reasons. Look up the history.

I'm not speaking to the history. I'm speaking to the severity of one versus the other. But never mind, you don't seem like the sharpest knife in the drawer - or the most rational - so it's not worth wasting another word trying to reason with you.

[Anonymous]

Yes, Aids worker, female circumcision can be much more extreme than male. But it most often isn't. Please don't accuse someone of being ignorant if you don't know what you are talking about, which is clearly the case.

For the PP, I found the discussion I was talking about, please read this. Aids worker, you might find this enlightening too: http://www.mummysg.com/forums/f40/have-you-sunat-your-girls-29826/

[Anonymous]

I am not in any way trivializing female mutilation, but suggesting that you consider it in the same way as male mutilation.

Here's another article that I suggest you read in its entirety. I used to agree with you until I read up more and better understood the cultural background behind female circumcision and realized that it is very similar to cutting boys.

http://joseph4gi.blogspot.com/2011/06/circumcision-is-child-abuse-picture.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

People keep this type of thing to themselves IRL.

As they should. Its not appropriate to interject yourself in these types of decisions for others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

People feel strongly about it. I wouldn't get in my friends' faces about their choices, because I'm not a confrontational person, but when I hear people say they are going to circ, or if I change a diaper of a friend's kid and realize they've circumcised, I have to admit that I definitely think less of them for it. But, my own decision was not easy to come to, and we nearly circ'd, and ultimately we decided not to because my brother's kid had a major infection and huge problems with his circ just before our kid was born, or otherwise we might have decided a different way. So I do try to tamp down the initial judgy feeling that comes up as I think it's easy to make the mistake of doing it, especially as it was for such a long time just the cultural norm, that nobody ever second-guessed. And, for a long time, people weren't even really aware of the risks and even said it wasn't painful to the baby. But, if I know you circ'd your baby, I think you made a mistake and didn't educate yourself and your kid suffered for it. I'm sure that will earn me flames, and Im sure many people will say who cares, and that's fine. But to those of you saying you never encounter this in real life, it doesn't mean people aren't silently thinking it.

Glad we probably aren't friends. Sounds like you are the uneducated one who has no concept of respecting others culture, religion and beliefs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

People keep this type of thing to themselves IRL.

As they should. Its not appropriate to interject yourself in these types of decisions for others.

except on DCUM of course

[Anonymous]

I read that mommy site and while the feedback/arguments for fgm are the same as for male circ, the feedback/arguments are also the same for vaccinations.

It's just one more decision parents make; not a big deal.

I want to make an "I judge you based on your child's genitals" bumper sticker for some of you zealots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Aids worker, when you have read up on and fully understand the different types of female circumcision then come back here and apologize to me for your ignorance. And, yes, male circumcision is also carried out for the same puritanical reasons. Look up the history.

I'm not speaking to the history. I'm speaking to the severity of one versus the other. But never mind, you don't seem like the sharpest knife in the drawer - or the most rational - so it's not worth wasting another word trying to reason with you.

I a new poster. The article referenced to above does make it seem as if female circumcision is no big deal--just a prick of a needle. However, that does not mesh with what I have witnessed living in Egypt, Sudan and Kenya where female circumcision is practiced. While there is great variety in circumcisions, the ones I saw and heard about all involved the cutting of tissue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not in any way trivializing female mutilation, but suggesting that you consider it in the same way as male mutilation.

Here's another article that I suggest you read in its entirety. I used to agree with you until I read up more and better understood the cultural background behind female circumcision and realized that it is very similar to cutting boys.

http://joseph4gi.blogspot.com/2011/06/circumcision-is-child-abuse-picture.html

Why exactly would I consider slicing off the labia and clitoris, often followed by sewing up the vaginal opening the same as removing a foreskin on a penis? Explain that to me. I'm not talking about the cultural background - at all. I'm talking about the severity of the procedure that you are trivializing.

Seriously, Google some images of circumcised girls and and then get back to me. Aside from the horror of seeing a mutilated vulva and the blood that goes with removing the flesh of the labia, you'll also note that FGM is typically performed on girls older than 5 (markedly different than male circumcision in most cultures). Study it - no not just reading a few anti male circumcision articles. But study FGM and then maybe you'll realize how A) insanely offensive the comparison is between male circumcision and FGM and B) how devastating FGM can be for a woman's health, never mind her sexuality (unlike male circumcision). There is NO comparison. Or, to put it another way, to say that there is similarities is to compare a cut to an amputation.