Is circumcision for non-religious reasons ghetto, trashy or low class?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think this link helps explain the extraordinary bias that we tend to have here in the US.
http://www.icgi.org/medicalization/

By the way, you lose all credibility when you talk about "extraordinary bias" and then cite a link to an organization called the International Coalition for Genital Integrity. Are you kidding? Why don't we just ask Keith Olbermann for an unbiased review of the Bush years?

Words from the ICGI v. the World Health Organization... hmm... who should I believe??

[Anonymous]

The OP has GOT to be a troll.

Best reason for circumcising, from my male friends: They get more BJs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think this link helps explain the extraordinary bias that we tend to have here in the US.
http://www.icgi.org/medicalization/

By the way, you lose all credibility when you talk about "extraordinary bias" and then cite a link to an organization called the International Coalition for Genital Integrity. Are you kidding? Why don't we just ask Keith Olbermann for an unbiased review of the Bush years?

Words from the ICGI v. the World Health Organization... hmm... who should I believe??

I don't know much about the World Health Organization, but I'd trust information from WHO over information from a lobbying group -instituted for the sole purpose of eliminating the practice of which we speak-. You can get a lot of anti-abortion information from the Right to Life campaign, too.

[Anonymous]

I still don't buy that you can take data from grown, sexually active men in a region with low condom usage and apply that globally. It's not the same culture with the same approach to sex.

Preventing H.I.V., but at What Price?
New York Times
April 15, 2007

...

Unfortunately, the data from Africa does not translate well. Those trials were of heterosexual men in countries where the virus is everywhere, education about safe sex is practically nonexistent, and condoms get in the way of the need to father children.

In the United States, the AIDS epidemic is very different. The highest risk groups are men having sex with men (whether openly or covertly or even forcibly — in prison rapes, for example), people who share needles and women who, often unknowingly, have sex with high-risk men. Although it has been killing people here for 25 years, AIDS has not turned into a generalized epidemic like it has in Africa. Sex education, condoms, abstinence, antiretroviral drugs and the fear of death have concentrated it mostly in small pockets of the population.

American Academy of Pediatrics: "Scientific studies show some medical benefits of circumcision. However, these benefits are not sufficient for the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) to recommend that all infant boys be circumcised."

American Medical Association, 1999: "Virtually all current policy statements from specialty societies and medical organizations do not recommend routine neonatal circumcision, and support the provision of accurate and unbiased information to parents to inform their choice."

[Anonymous]

OP here...not a troll or even frequent poster, much less topic starter.

I regret the strong laguage I choose in composing my original post...I was just heated from reading the baby girl and earring thread. I don't even have any boys. If I have one I am leaning towards not circumsizing but if my hubby felt strongly for it, that prob would sway me. But I would do it feeling it is a cosmetic procedure akin to ear piercing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Query? I'm from Europe where male circumcision is almost exclusively done only for religious reasons and I was quite surprised to find it so prevalent when I came here. Does anybody know what the origins of it being so common here are?

It is just another example of unnecessary medical procedures that doctors here can charge $$ for. That's how you get the most expensive healthcare system without the best health outcomes.

You're kidding, right? The greatest advances in medicine are made in the United States. Just ask all the wealthy Europeans and Saudi princes who fly into the Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins, etc., for treatment.

God, I can't stand liberals.

Hey, there, now. I'm a liberal and I agree with you 100%.

Actually, I consider myself a progressive, meaning I believe in progress. Part of that is putting my faith in science and medicine instead of in know-it-all, hysterical mothers who no doubt react disproportionately to all kinds of other nonsense.

We probably have more in common that you think, poster!

I read, researched and spoke to other parents before deciding not to circumcise, yet I'm hysterical? There have been few studies, which upon further research are problematic at best, supporting circumcision. The American Academy of Pediatrics doesn't endorse routine circumcision. If anything, I'd say circumcising based on what little research is out there supporting more closely resembles "reacting disproportionately."

If depicting people who disagree with you as "know-it-all" and "hysterical" makes you feel more secure in your decision, go to it.

No, you are not hysterical. I posted earlier saying that thoughtful arguments are made on both sides of this debate. It sounds like you are someone, like myself, who gave this decision much thought and made a decision based on what you thought was best. As it should be, since you are the mommy. As the mommy also, after consulting with my husband, and with a close friend who is a doctor, we decided that even small long-term health benefits were a compelling reason. I am very comfortable with my decision, because we made it as his parents, without influence of friends or message boards.

But there is no denying that some are indeed hysterical, self-congratulatory, and not satisfied unless they have shamed and labeled ad butchers moms who've circ'ed. Read some of these responses, check out some other message boards, and do some internet research. Those who spend a lot of time thinking about this are extremists who do not represent the majority of views on both sides of this debate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Query? I'm from Europe where male circumcision is almost exclusively done only for religious reasons and I was quite surprised to find it so prevalent when I came here. Does anybody know what the origins of it being so common here are?

It is just another example of unnecessary medical procedures that doctors here can charge $$ for. That's how you get the most expensive healthcare system without the best health outcomes.

You're kidding, right? The greatest advances in medicine are made in the United States. Just ask all the wealthy Europeans and Saudi princes who fly into the Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins, etc., for treatment.

God, I can't stand liberals.

Hey, there, now. I'm a liberal and I agree with you 100%.

Actually, I consider myself a progressive, meaning I believe in progress. Part of that is putting my faith in science and medicine instead of in know-it-all, hysterical mothers who no doubt react disproportionately to all kinds of other nonsense.

We probably have more in common that you think, poster!

I read, researched and spoke to other parents before deciding not to circumcise, yet I'm hysterical? There have been few studies, which upon further research are problematic at best, supporting circumcision. The American Academy of Pediatrics doesn't endorse routine circumcision. If anything, I'd say circumcising based on what little research is out there supporting more closely resembles "reacting disproportionately."

If depicting people who disagree with you as "know-it-all" and "hysterical" makes you feel more secure in your decision, go to it.

No, you are not hysterical. I posted earlier saying that thoughtful arguments are made on both sides of this debate. It sounds like you are someone, like myself, who gave this decision much thought and made a decision based on what you thought was best. As it should be, since you are the mommy. As the mommy also, after consulting with my husband, and with a close friend who is a doctor, we decided that even small long-term health benefits were a compelling reason. I am very comfortable with my decision, because we made it as his parents, without influence of friends or message boards.

But there is no denying that some are indeed hysterical, self-congratulatory, and not satisfied unless they have shamed and labeled ad butchers moms who've circ'ed. Read some of these responses, check out some other message boards, and do some internet research. Those who spend a lot of time thinking about this are extremists who do not represent the majority of views on both sides of this debate.

And there are folks who make it sound like I've doomed my son to lifelong bachelorhood and humiliation, and willfully put him at greater risk of contracting a life-threatening illness because I've chosen against circumcision. Yes, it is a contentious issue.

[Anonymous]

I passed this thread by many times because I thought it would be silly. Circumcision is a medical, not moral, issue, I thought. But then some strange electronic presentiment led me here.

It's even worse than I imagined. It's as silly as wearing a Howard sweatshirt to a FAMU game. It's as ridiculous as waking up one day and saying, "I don't like the chocolate here so I'm just going pack up and move to...Belgium."

Inane. Puerile. Genius.

I'm hooked!

[Anonymous]

All over Europe, it'd be only done for religious reasons.
We didn't mess with our baby boys.

[Anonymous]

It is much easier for a woman to check for STDs in a circumcised man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is much easier for a woman to check for STDs in a circumcised man.

Many STDs cannot be seen, i.e., herpes can be passed-on during "shedding" and are not visible at that time. Also, who looks at with a microscope before having sex?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All over Europe, it'd be only done for religious reasons.
We didn't mess with our baby boys.

Yes, Europe is perfect. We know. You are a model and beacon to us all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:'I think the whole health benefits argument has been disproven for ages now.'


OP, you are sadly misinformed and to compare ear piercing to male circumcision is ridiculous. I work for a public health NGO that has made great strides in sub-saharan Africa in educating the population about male circumcision and HIV. Many people dedicate their lives and make tremendous sacrifices in the field of HIV prevention. The scientific community and the WHO happen to believe that male circumcision DOES have health benefits and we have plenty of research to back us up. If you are going to bash people on the other thread, find a topic that you are less ignorant about.

You sadly are the one that is misinformed. The study was done on non Muslim men who visit prostitutes vs. circ'ed Muslim men who don't. The link to the specifics of that study have been posted here before.

[Anonymous]

There is a good review of the benefits of male circumcision in the U.S. and abroad in today's New York Times, link http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/24/health/policy/24circumcision.html?hp . Specifically, it mentions the American Academy of Pediatrics softening its stance on circumcision in the near future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All over Europe, it'd be only done for religious reasons.
We didn't mess with our baby boys.

So, your men have pretty cocks but totally fucked up teeth? Hooray for you.