Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My guess for the reason for infections is that the generation born in the 60s-80s in the US was heavily circumcised. Since those are now the parents, it makes sense to me that they are not teaching their uncirced sons how to clean themselves, because they don't know.
But nothing special has to be done. There is pretty much nothing to teach other than to wash yourself thoroughly which kids should be doing anyway.
Do you instruct your daughter to retract her clitoral hood and wash with soap and water underneath there? Do you instruct your son to retract his forskin and do the same? Do you assume they will know how to properly clean their genitalia?
No soap under either hood or foreskin. And don't douche.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My guess for the reason for infections is that the generation born in the 60s-80s in the US was heavily circumcised. Since those are now the parents, it makes sense to me that they are not teaching their uncirced sons how to clean themselves, because they don't know.
But nothing special has to be done. There is pretty much nothing to teach other than to wash yourself thoroughly which kids should be doing anyway.
Do you instruct your daughter to retract her clitoral hood and wash with soap and water underneath there? Do you instruct your son to retract his forskin and do the same? Do you assume they will know how to properly clean their genitalia?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My guess for the reason for infections is that the generation born in the 60s-80s in the US was heavily circumcised. Since those are now the parents, it makes sense to me that they are not teaching their uncirced sons how to clean themselves, because they don't know.
But nothing special has to be done. There is pretty much nothing to teach other than to wash yourself thoroughly which kids should be doing anyway.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My guess for the reason for infections is that the generation born in the 60s-80s in the US was heavily circumcised. Since those are now the parents, it makes sense to me that they are not teaching their uncirced sons how to clean themselves, because they don't know.
But nothing special has to be done. There is pretty much nothing to teach other than to wash yourself thoroughly which kids should be doing anyway.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Poster 08:24, just because you've never heard of something, it does not mean it never happens. Outside of these boards, I am sure the discussion of circumcision at birth or later in life remains a private matter discussed only amongst the closest people to the male in question.
But if you did actual research, I'm sure it would also show that "constant infections" are not an issue in Europe, where people generally aren't circumcised. Certainly, their STD rates aren't any higher.
Notice, I did not mention anything about constant infections or STD rates.
All I said was just because you've never seen or heard of something, it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Funny thing about research, someone actually has to research it and it has to be published for you to know about it. Not to mention, you actually have to go and look for the information. Dr. Google is good but is not the end all be all of medical research.
Did I say something about Dr. Google being actual research? And the subject of the debate that you joined was whether uncircumcised teenagers experienced "constant infections". Or what were you referring to? Nobody disputed that infections may occasionally happen (usually due to improper cleaning practices).
I'm not 8:24, btw.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Poster 08:24, just because you've never heard of something, it does not mean it never happens. Outside of these boards, I am sure the discussion of circumcision at birth or later in life remains a private matter discussed only amongst the closest people to the male in question.
But if you did actual research, I'm sure it would also show that "constant infections" are not an issue in Europe, where people generally aren't circumcised. Certainly, their STD rates aren't any higher.
Notice, I did not mention anything about constant infections or STD rates.
All I said was just because you've never seen or heard of something, it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Funny thing about research, someone actually has to research it and it has to be published for you to know about it. Not to mention, you actually have to go and look for the information. Dr. Google is good but is not the end all be all of medical research.
Did I say something about Dr. Google being actual research? And the subject of the debate that you joined was whether uncircumcised teenagers experienced "constant infections". Or what were you referring to? Nobody disputed that infections may occasionally happen (usually due to improper cleaning practices).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Poster 08:24, just because you've never heard of something, it does not mean it never happens. Outside of these boards, I am sure the discussion of circumcision at birth or later in life remains a private matter discussed only amongst the closest people to the male in question.
But if you did actual research, I'm sure it would also show that "constant infections" are not an issue in Europe, where people generally aren't circumcised. Certainly, their STD rates aren't any higher.
Notice, I did not mention anything about constant infections or STD rates.
All I said was just because you've never seen or heard of something, it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Funny thing about research, someone actually has to research it and it has to be published for you to know about it. Not to mention, you actually have to go and look for the information. Dr. Google is good but is not the end all be all of medical research.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Poster 08:24, just because you've never heard of something, it does not mean it never happens. Outside of these boards, I am sure the discussion of circumcision at birth or later in life remains a private matter discussed only amongst the closest people to the male in question.
But if you did actual research, I'm sure it would also show that "constant infections" are not an issue in Europe, where people generally aren't circumcised. Certainly, their STD rates aren't any higher.
Anonymous wrote:Poster 08:24, just because you've never heard of something, it does not mean it never happens. Outside of these boards, I am sure the discussion of circumcision at birth or later in life remains a private matter discussed only amongst the closest people to the male in question.
Anonymous wrote:Poster 08:24, just because you've never heard of something, it does not mean it never happens. Outside of these boards, I am sure the discussion of circumcision at birth or later in life remains a private matter discussed only amongst the closest people to the male in question.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My guess for the reason for infections is that the generation born in the 60s-80s in the US was heavily circumcised. Since those are now the parents, it makes sense to me that they are not teaching their uncirced sons how to clean themselves, because they don't know.
But nothing special has to be done. There is pretty much nothing to teach other than to wash yourself thoroughly which kids should be doing anyway.
Anonymous wrote:My guess for the reason for infections is that the generation born in the 60s-80s in the US was heavily circumcised. Since those are now the parents, it makes sense to me that they are not teaching their uncirced sons how to clean themselves, because they don't know.