- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
June 2011 Moms
I judge...
This discussion has been closed.
Re: I judge...
I like the picture, personally. Because we are ALL right about the decisions we make for OUR families. They're our families, not yours, so it's inappropriate to judge the decisions made when you're not IN the family. I find this to be particularly apropos when speaking of circumcision. One person may feel it akin to female genital mutilation while another has personal experience over the health issues it can cause later in life not to do it. To-may-to, to-mah-to. I find it particularly entertaining when the individuals who get up in arms over the topic have already pierced their infant daughter's ears because, you know, she was 4 months old but could consent. (FTR I could care less if the ears are pierced that young, just making a comparison.)
I didn't see anything wrong with what, or how, justme04 said the thing about pacis/bottles, even though Martin is over 1 and still has both (paci whenever he feels like it, bottle in the AM). It was her opinion and that's fine. I disagree that babies learn to self soothe that early, it's more of a preference thing IMO. According to my mother, I never took to a paci. Doesn't mean I could self soothe any better or worse than the next kid.
I get that the board has been slow (hell, I haven't been on here in AGES), but this type of thread is bound to either piss people off or hurt their feelings. I'm not sure how conducive it is to open discussion.
I agree with you on the juice and sugar!
I don't agree with you that circumcision is a " soap box rant that people use to make themselves feel superior to the general population/other moms."
In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.
I don't think that choosing to circumcise your child is "ignorant." Obviously, you feel that way, but there is also a lot of data showing that it can lead to a higher chance of STDs, HIV, infections, etc, to NOT snip snip. So, I really think it's up to the parents.
I don't think your objection should be about circumcising, but rather against parents who make decisions without doing any research. I think all of us can agree that we would respect any parent's choices for their child as long as they are doing it out of love and it having been researched.
Good to see you back, Hep!!
Yes, yes it is. And that opinion can be applied to both sides.
Of course it can, it can be applied to anything.
Eeek! This is exactly why I never post my true feelings regarding certain topics, they are just too heated, and I suck at taking the heat!
I really like you, so I hope this comes across correctly...but were you really expecting a rational, calm discussion when you just told probably 40ish% of this board they did something not-normal, and not-okay, and then pretty much insinuated that they mutilated their sons? If you weren't looking for heat a simple "I hate this picture because I feel very strongly about not circumcising" would have sufficed.
I think everyone should stand up for their own opinion always and remember what we feel is right, isn't always right for everyone else. I am more parents decision myself on circumcision. It doesn't register for me either way.
In these "discussions" we have to remember that we are putting ourselves out there and there will always be someone who doesn't agree. But without stating our opinions we can't ever learn from one another. It's how we open our eyes to different views other than our own.
Never be ashamed or scared to share your view, just understand that someone will not always see it your way.
With that said we pierced F's ears but probably would not circ if we had/have a boy. To each their own. I'm not going to judge because it's not my place or business what others do with their kids peen.
BLOG
I feel that the comparison to female genital mutilation is just as invalid as the comparison to pierced ears. FGM is used to control girls in a society and ensure that they won't feel pleasure during sex. Reasons for circumsizing are not vile and does not stop boys from anything.
Agreed.
I really do think the picture is good because it does present circumcision as something some parents will choose and others will not, but that both will decide on based on their own research/beliefs, and that both decisions are valid.
For a long time circumcision was a standard medical procedure. Then the AAP said that it had potential medical benefits but wasn't necessary as a routine procedure. When that was the prevailing AAP recommendation, I was pregnant, and that advice led me to decide that if I had a boy he would not be circumcised, even though DH is and we had always kind of assumed a DS would be. (In the end I had a girl, so it didn't matter.) Then, this year, just a few weeks ago, the AAP came out with a new statement that the benefits of circumcision (including reduction in STD transmittal) CLEARLY outweighed the risks, leading me and DH to think that if we had a boy now, we would have him circumcised.
https://www.cnn.com/2012/08/27/health/aap-circumcision-recommendation/index.html
But at no point when I thought a DS would not be circumcised, nor now when I think he would be circumcised, have I judged others for the decision they make on this issue, because it is clearly an issue open for debate and there are good reasons on both sides, and good mothers who have done their research and love their children more than anything make different decisions.
The picture also includes a cosleeping mom. Some people view cosleeping as risking your baby's life because of suffocation risks. Others view cosleeping as natural and nurturing and good for the baby. People have strong opinions on both sides, and again, good mothers who have done their research and love their children more than anything, make different decisions.
That's the whole point.
I am quite sure that most people, especially the women on here, that chose to circumcize did in fact do their research. And I do recall that very recently there was a new discussion on here in regards to circumcision and the latest studies which, from what I understand, actually is more in favor of circumcision and may have caused a few people top rethink their decisions. I think your initial post in this thread was way beyond the usual judgy and, in my opinion, downright mean. Thankfully we have a daugther, didn't need to make this decision (although we had our preference and I had done some research, etc.).
And I do have to second whoever said something along the lines of anti-circ, but have the ears pierced quite young.
Completely agree with this. Earrings can be taken out, holes can grow back in. Foreskin on the other hand...
With that being said, I'm certainly not 'against' circumcision. I understand why people might do it for religious reasons, or with a family history of complications from not circumcising. If we have a son next, we likely won't be circumcising but it's certainly not something I would judge others for doing.
Like a PP mentioned, everyone does their own research and decides what's best for their family.
And fwiw, I also like the above picture.
I'm not going to get in to it too much because to me everyone is doing what is right for their families.
That being said, I mentioned before that I judged a woman on my FB page for showing pictures of her 18 (now 19) month old drinking from a bottle. I still judge her because I know her and know that there is not a medical reason, and that her LO drinks from multiple kinds of cups! Sippy, straw and spillproof practice cups.
I could understand if the LO just wasn't adjusting well to not using the bottle, but she flat out said something to SIL (one of her good friends which is how I know all of this) that she didn't want to upset her DD by taking it back from her.
Another judgement - when people don't think they need to brush LOs teeth because a.) they only have x amount, or b.) they're just going to lose them anyway!
Not comparing this to FGM in ANY way, shape or form, but there are sexual side effects to circumcising. The foreskin is there to protect the penis (and keep it lubricated), when removed the penis is now exposed to air 24/7, clothing, etc. this makes the head of the penis desensitized slightly affecting sexual pleasure. It also makes the skin around the penis tight (think forwards/backwards motion), so when excited instead of having the room to "grow" it is pulled tight and stretching the skin. Again, this is NOT similar to FGM, but there are side effects to circumcising that last beyond the "healing period".
I honestly wish there was a controlled study to show the real health "risks" of circumcision (both ways). Take out the circumcisions that are done in unsanitary ways (because sucking the blood out with your mouth is just not right), and take out the men who get infections because they just don't wash themselves (because lets face it ladies, if you don't clean yourself you will end up with a yeast infection) and break it down to the real facts.. Then everyone can be informed and make their decision.
Exactly why we had DS circumcised. I don't think I'd be able to live with myself if something happened to him because he wasn't cleaning himself properly. TBH, boys are nasty :P
So you are judging yourself for judging us for judging others? I can handle that!!!
Well said! I especially agree with the bolded. I'm trying to come up with something original, but all of my major issues were already stated: smoking around kids, FFing before 2, and giving soda.
Yep! :-)
I'm a bit late on this, but here's my 2 cents.
I judge those who take their kids out in public whether it be a restaurant, store, etc. WITHOUT socks or shoes!! If your kid is walking for Gods sake put some shoes on them!!
Hahahha you would be judging my DH then! Drives me crazy!!! One time he took her to a play area at the mall without socks or shoes, I was at work and he sent me a photo. He reasons "well they need to take off their shoes anyway when they go in there so why bother with the shoes?" oh men.....