I've seriously never seen a circumcised penis IRL. All my dudes have been uncut, including DH.
That being said, we're choosing not to circumsise. We do not personally agree with the practice.
Until my SO I had never seen an uncut. I was a little weary on hurting him at first but found it makes him more sensitive than other men I know. I'm glad he isn't tbh
I'll be honest, until I joined this group I never knew this was such a debated topic. I've read the pros & cons and understand both sides.
So far I think we're going to do it. DH wants it done, and the only guy I know who wasn't circumsized wishes he had been. He felt really uncomfortable about himself for years and was nervous approaching women even into early adulthood because of it.
Sure, there are a lot of things that can make someone self conscious but i just wonder who our little guy would talk to about it if that were the case. DH & all the other men in both of our families had it done so they wouldn't be in the same boat.
And i know it can be done as an adult....but it's much different to do as an adult.
I dunno. This one really is a hard one. I don't condemn anyone making either decision. I think it's just a guess and hoping your son agrees with your decision later on life.
Yes it is obviously more painful as an adult, but since it is cosmetic and alters the function of a body part (foreskin has several functions), I want my son to have a choice. Hypothetically, if I chose to get a breast lift and implants, or a breast reduction for back pain, or labiaplasty bc I'm super self conscious of the size of my labia minora to the point that I can't relax and enjoy sex, that surgery and recovery would be a beast too. I would never cut my daughter's labia minora because I know she will be self conscious of her large labia minora one day too.
Also, the circumcision rate for our generation was high (like 80%). Now it's down to around 30-40%, so males of this generation will not be "different" anymore if they are left intact.
I've seriously never seen a circumcised penis IRL. All my dudes have been uncut, including DH.
That being said, we're choosing not to circumsise. We do not personally agree with the practice.
Me either! That's why I find these discussions so interesting. Circumcision is something we don't even think about in Europe, it's just not done unless there are religious or medical reasons. I just struggle to get my head round why it's done for cosmetic reasons in the US. That's not a criticism, just a fact that I struggle to comprehend the reasoning behind it.
I've seriously never seen a circumcised penis IRL. All my dudes have been uncut, including DH.
That being said, we're choosing not to circumsise. We do not personally agree with the practice.
Until my SO I had never seen an uncut. I was a little weary on hurting him at first but found it makes him more sensitive than other men I know. I'm glad he isn't tbh
This is me !! My bf now is the only one who was circumsized ! I was scared to touch him at first.
I have a hard time seeing a baby who is cut. Basically, it looks like they have a tiny erection all the time. And none of the pain relief is adequate so while an adult might remember the pain they don't hurt more and they get good meds to deal with it. Babies feel pain more acutely than adults, that is an indisputable fact.
I have a hard time seeing a baby who is cut. Basically, it looks like they have a tiny erection all the time. And none of the pain relief is adequate so while an adult might remember the pain they don't hurt more and they get good meds to deal with it. Babies feel pain more acutely than adults, that is an indisputable fact.
LOL I laughed at your post ! " looks like they have a tiny erection all the time" !
I have a hard time seeing a baby who is cut. Basically, it looks like they have a tiny erection all the time. And none of the pain relief is adequate so while an adult might remember the pain they don't hurt more and they get good meds to deal with it. Babies feel pain more acutely than adults, that is an indisputable fact.
LOL I laughed at your post ! " looks like they have a tiny erection all the time" !
It's true! My SO thought i was crazy until we babysat his nephew and then he was mad i ever brought it up cause now he can't unthink it.
I have a hard time seeing a baby who is cut. Basically, it looks like they have a tiny erection all the time. And none of the pain relief is adequate so while an adult might remember the pain they don't hurt more and they get good meds to deal with it. Babies feel pain more acutely than adults, that is an indisputable fact.
LOL I laughed at your post ! " looks like they have a tiny erection all the time" !
It's true! My SO thought i was crazy until we babysat his nephew and then he was mad i ever brought it up cause now he can't unthink it.
I would encourage those who are planning on circumcising to look up videos on the procedure, just to know what the baby is going to go through. I think it is important to be aware!
I completely agree with this. We have 2 girls and are team green this time so this discussion has happened in our house. My husband was very pro-circ until her actually did some research himself. We have decided to not circ at birth. If a problem arises and it needs addressed later, that is what we will do. Also, my cousin is a urology nurse and she said that whatever decision we make she would NEVER let an OB/pedi do the circ. it should be done by a urologist within the first 6 weeks, if it is going to be done. The amount of corrections and revisions that they have to do is astronomical.
Warning
No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
My husband is uncircumcised and he and I both wish that he was. It's harder to keep clean and tends to make that area more stinky
Ugh, it's exactly like a vagina, as far as bacteria and moisture, so it does need to be cleaned. Has he ever been tested for yeast or anything? If he is having odor issues there could be am underlying problem.
My husband is uncircumcised and he and I both wish that he was. It's harder to keep clean and tends to make that area more stinky
Ugh, it's exactly like a vagina, as far as bacteria and moisture, so it does need to be cleaned. Has he ever been tested for yeast or anything? If he is having odor issues there could be am underlying problem.
Exactly! Should all of us ladies chop our labia off so that we won't have to deal with the inconvenience of washing our privates?
My husband is uncircumcised and he and I both wish that he was. It's harder to keep clean and tends to make that area more stinky
I've been with uncircumcised men and I do agree that it does tend to sweat more and have its own smell.. And I agree if they don't clean it properly it can get even worse. I personally prefer a circumsized penis, I like the feeling way better !!!!!
I had seen the worst side of circumcision before I even was considering having a child, also learned how many deaths there are from it. Yet when it came to my own, I was stumped by all the "it's up to you" opinions out there.
Deciding to do it as a "hygiene" thing isn't thinking of the best interest for long term function. I don't kid myself and think vaginas are by human worries very clean even with proper cleaning/care. So going off a smell to say something is cleaner one way than another is a little out there...
My husband is circumcised, his parents did it because of their religious beliefs. But he has decided as an adult not to have those beliefs. He can truly say it does affect sexual function/sensitivity. His opinion on it has been always been obvious that something is missing that he should have.
Sure when you're young and sex crazed things work good enough. My husband is only in his early 30's and already had to resort to more extreme methods than just letting things happen naturally every time(might have even helped me get pregnant lol). I'd say as far as guy issues are concerned that's more embarrassing than worrying about the extra skin that you were born with. Drugs like viagra and other products that help are a big industry, and circumcision is big reason why.
I was even talking to my parents about it recently, I have two older brothers, they had it done just because of that normal education that looking like their father might be important. But in that same discussion it came out that my middle brother who is the more sensitive of the two was pretty traumatized by the experienced and that never changed even with age.
My husband is uncircumcised and he and I both wish that he was. It's harder to keep clean and tends to make that area more stinky
I'm sorry but this just isn't true if you wash daily.
Agreed. My husband is uncircumcised and has never had a problem with this with daily cleansing. Like @komorebi wrote, maybe there's an underlying issue for the odor?
We won't be circumcising our son. To DH, this has nothing to do with his son having a similar-looking penis as his, he and I both did our research and spoke with our doctor and don't deem this a necessary procedure.
Serious question, mainly because I'm a bit bored with most of the threads. Hope this doesn't cause an issue. Do people really circumcise because they don't want to thoroughly wash their genitals? I want to know if this is some people's reason.
I would certainly hope that's not true! That's just.so.gross.
Serious question, mainly because I'm a bit bored with most of the threads. Hope this doesn't cause an issue. Do people really circumcise because they don't want to thoroughly wash their genitals? I want to know if this is some people's reason.
I usually tend to not comment on circ threads just because I think it's such a personal decision BUT I can say I have never seen the "it makes washing easier" as a true reason. I would hope people are not using that as their sole reasoning anyways. The biggest reason I usually see is that they want their child to be the same as the father.
My DH is the first man I've been with that's circumcised.. The lack of lubrication actually causes us some issues and he has a lot of issues with sensitivity. When we asked his mom why she decided this she went all defensive and said "well his dad got it done!". Great. That's just.. thank you for doing your research before making such a big decision. :-w
Oh, and no man i've ever been with smelled funny down there. It's called washing. I dont know about you gals, but I wash my down there every morning with some water. If an uncircumcised man does the same thing to his parts there is no hygiene issue to speak of. Literally takes like 10 seconds out of your morning.
Honestly, until I got pregnant with DS and saw so many discussions on this topic, I assumed that circumcision was what was done and thought it was unhygienic not to . . . Probably largely a cultural thing, but I've only seen one or two uncirc'd penises (and in one case it belonged to an individual whose home I worked in and who I had to bathe and change).
Now, I don't really understand the continued practice of circumcision for cosmetic reasons. Penises are kinda ugly, IMO. So are labia. But I'm not planning on having labiaplasty to make mine prettier. If it was a legitimate hygiene issue, that would be a different story.
Oh and before becoming a mom, I didn't know that baby boys actually get erections, often right before they pee all over you. That was a little startling to see the first time.
I am having a boy and my husband and I are not circumcising him. I don't want to have my son endure this barbaric practice. The original purpose was to prevent masterbation in catholic based societies. Needless to say, it didn't work. My son will be perfect the way he is. When he is older, he can make the decision himself.
While I think you may be right that circumcision became such a thing in Western culture due to the Catholic Church, circumcision was practiced far before the Catholic Church came into existence. The ancient Hebrews believed they'd been commanded by God to have their sons circumcised, which is why many modern-day Jewish boys are circumcised. There are also some tribal cultures that still practice circumcision as a rite of passage into manhood.
I believe it was also thought to be more hygienic, though I think on more recent times, circumcision was done just because that's what we did.
All this is not to defend the practice though . . .
I just wanted to throw this out there, today the Catholic Church doesn't care whether or not you circumcise your son. It's the parent's decision from what I've read and been told.
If it stinks, something is going on. That's for men and women. I've never encountered a bad smelling uncircumcised man. My boyfriend's never smells. Saying it's for hygienic purposes is a cop put. That's what soap water and some good scrubbing is for!
Serious question, mainly because I'm a bit bored with most of the threads. Hope this doesn't cause an issue. Do people really circumcise because they don't want to thoroughly wash their genitals? I want to know if this is some people's reason.
I usually tend to not comment on circ threads just because I think it's such a personal decision BUT I can say I have never seen the "it makes washing easier" as a true reason. I would hope people are not using that as their sole reasoning anyways. The biggest reason I usually see is that they want their child to be the same as the father.
Another reason a lot of people circumsize is to prevent phimosis, and prevent frenulum tearing and further surgeries !
@amberrmariee20 Yea I know there are totally legit reasons that might come up. Someone mentioned a reason was the smell. I was a bit confused!
I been with uncircumsized and I can definitely say they have their own unique smell and if not throughly cleaned it's nasty !! I'm one who prefers circumsized ! But we plan to circumsize our son to avoid ripped frenulum and phimosis !
@amberrmariee20 Yea I know there are totally legit reasons that might come up. Someone mentioned a reason was the smell. I was a bit confused!
I been with uncircumsized and I can definitely say they have their own unique smell and if not throughly cleaned it's nasty !! I'm one who prefers circumsized ! But we plan to circumsize our son to avoid ripped frenulum and phimosis !
Circumcision is not the only option if a man suffers from either or both of these conditions. In fact, circumcision is regarded as a last resort in most countries. A ripped frenulum will most often heal itself in a few days and in the rare cases it does not then a frenuloplasty would be offered before a circumcision which is much less evasive and painful. Phimosis is not that common and again usually resolves itself over time. Doing a quick search online I found that Phimosis is often over-treated in children. A diagnosis of phimosis in a child under the age of 12 is almost always false. Overzealous doctors and concerned parents who have been misinformed, result in an overwhelming number of children being unnecessarily circumcised each year. The foreskin isn’t supposed to retract in male boys under the age of 2. In fact, male children are born with foreskins that are physically fused with the glans. By age 12, one out of four children are still unable to retract their foreskin and this is quite normal as well. By age 18 only 2% of men have a foreskin that won’t retract and those are the true cases of phimosis that warrant any kind of treatment. (Most of that info came from phimosis.com)
@amberrmariee20 Yea I know there are totally legit reasons that might come up. Someone mentioned a reason was the smell. I was a bit confused!
I been with uncircumsized and I can definitely say they have their own unique smell and if not throughly cleaned it's nasty !! I'm one who prefers circumsized ! But we plan to circumsize our son to avoid ripped frenulum and phimosis !
Circumcision is not the only option if a man suffers from either or both of these conditions. In fact, circumcision is regarded as a last resort in most countries. A ripped frenulum will most often heal itself in a few days and in the rare cases it does not then a frenuloplasty would be offered before a circumcision which is much less evasive and painful. Phimosis is not that common and again usually resolves itself over time. Doing a quick search online I found that Phimosis is often over-treated in children. A diagnosis of phimosis in a child under the age of 12 is almost always false. Overzealous doctors and concerned parents who have been misinformed, result in an overwhelming number of children being unnecessarily circumcised each year. The foreskin isn’t supposed to retract in male boys under the age of 2. In fact, male children are born with foreskins that are physically fused with the glans. By age 12, one out of four children are still unable to retract their foreskin and this is quite normal as well. By age 18 only 2% of men have a foreskin that won’t retract and those are the true cases of phimosis that warrant any kind of treatment. (Most of that info came from phimosis.com)
I ripped my exs frenulum, and it wouldn't heal properly so they put him in for surgery I'm guessing it was the frenuloplasty you mentioned. But his continued to be super tight and sensitive afterwards... Not sure if he still has issues with it but once it ripped it was never the same as he said !
I seen 2 penis with phimosis and omg nasty is all I can say ! It was traumatizing to think what is under there !!
My pediatrician told me not to pull my sons foreskin back until after age 2 ! So until age 2 we didn't pull it back at all, he's almost 4 now and he doesn't mind having it pulled back and cleaned ! He was left uncircumsized because he had other health issues going on at birth and another surgery would of been too much for him !
Im sorry Im not going to thoroughly post my opinions on here as no matter how many times i have had this discussion (i am having a boy) I get attacked and told I'm a monster even when i give my reasoning and evidence etc. Either way i am for a person being able to choose what they think is best for their own child and that others should use logical arguments if they want to push their own side. However, I just wanted to throw this piece of thought out there how the hell can a man that has had a circumcision done as an infant "know" that sex is different for him that an un-cut man? there is absolutely no way to know that unless he had it done as an adult and in that case it would vary by person because i have know people that had it done as adults and say that there really is no difference to them. Also, why is it that sexual pleasure seems to be the most commonly brought up argument when i read why boys should be un-cut? to me that is not a good enough reason not to do it if you have seen that things can go wrong without it. Maybe people don't know the actual health risks both ways. seriously why can't people give facts that are relevant to the child pain or health wise. It just frustrates me so much. Also having a stinky penis is not a good reason to get it done, that would just tell me that maybe father and son will both need to have proper education on cleaning their genitals. And one last thing i agree with one of the pp that if you are debating it you should look up the procedure to see how it is done but make sure its not some insane foreign country procedure that has a completely different method than where you live.
The burden of proof should lie with those cutting off a functional part of a babies sexual anatomy. Nobody anticirc here posted anything that isn't supported by research.
There is no procedure done without risks. Baby boys die from the procedure in the United states, and many more are harmed.
I'm just glad it's not as popular today as it was. It's a culturally engrained traditionand as less people opt for it andthe boys grow up just fine then justifications will seem more and more rediculous.
Im sorry Im not going to thoroughly post my opinions on here as no matter how many times i have had this discussion (i am having a boy) I get attacked and told I'm a monster even when i give my reasoning and evidence etc. Either way i am for a person being able to choose what they think is best for their own child and that others should use logical arguments if they want to push their own side. However, I just wanted to throw this piece of thought out there how the hell can a man that has had a circumcision done as an infant "know" that sex is different for him that an un-cut man? there is absolutely no way to know that unless he had it done as an adult and in that case it would vary by person because i have know people that had it done as adults and say that there really is no difference to them. Also, why is it that sexual pleasure seems to be the most commonly brought up argument when i read why boys should be un-cut? to me that is not a good enough reason not to do it if you have seen that things can go wrong without it. Maybe people don't know the actual health risks both ways. seriously why can't people give facts that are relevant to the child pain or health wise. It just frustrates me so much. Also having a stinky penis is not a good reason to get it done, that would just tell me that maybe father and son will both need to have proper education on cleaning their genitals. And one last thing i agree with one of the pp that if you are debating it you should look up the procedure to see how it is done but make sure its not some insane foreign country procedure that has a completely different method than where you live.
The only sexual pleasure argument I ever make is regarding a very increased likelihood of erectile dysfunction in circumcised males. It is a fact, backed up by studies.
The thing that I am most confused by when people claim medical reasons for infant circumcision is that there have been no studies proving that there is a medical benefit. There only "may" be a benefit. So we know there are definitely drawbacks to circ, and there are only MAYBE benefits that the medical community has thus far been unable to prove (so, then are there truly? Thinking no, since science can't back it up).
I attached the information from the doctor about Infant circumcision, and even in there it states: "however, at the present time, there is not enough information to recommend routine newborn circumcision for health reasons."
So a practice that has been going on for as long as it has is yet been able to show any health benefits for it. Interesting, no? Yes, it makes hygiene easier, but that is truly about it. It is basically done for religious reasons (totally understandable), cosmetic (aka to look like dad), or for unprovable medical reasons. You would THINK people would need more cold hard facts to allow their child to suffer genital mutilation, but it is just so normalized in our society. Like female genital mutilation is ingrained in some other societies.
The whole thing is just really quite sad. I am married to a circumcised man, who is very well educated, is the CEO of a very large company, is very opinionated, and is hard to convince to change his mind. He wanted to get our son circumcised. I gave him the research from both sides without interjecting my opinion in any way. After reading it, he told me that he felt it would be best to leave our son in tact (I was so relieved). So he is an example of a father supporting a change in the norm for the sake of his child's health. I honestly think the practice will become less and less common, especially once insurance drops the procedure from coverage and moves it to the "elective cosmetic" category. Insurance is on the way there already because there has been no scientific evidence to support the claims of medical benefits.
All of my friends with sons have had them circumcised and 100% of them did it so that their boys will look like daddy (cosmetic). Several of their boys have had to undergo revisions, or will undergo revisions soon because of complications. One even got a bad infection from his circ. I totally support them in doing what they feel is best, it just always breaks my heart that they don't ever seem to take the time to research such a hugely important decision. Ethically, it should be up to the person being altered since foreskin can never be put back on.
Please don't think i am trying to single anyone out or that i am aiming this in one direction or the other. I am still researching and haven't made a decision as to what i want to do. I was just stating in general with most of the forums that i have seen in general not just on this site. I was simply putting my feelings on here with a few examples of things i have read. Im sorry if it came off that i was attempting to single anyone out or that i was saying no one provided information. I now it isn't the responsibility of a poster to give information with facts but if you are genuinely trying to help people change their minds then information would be given. Again not directed towards everyone. I know when i looked for help in finding actual factual information all i got was how if i do it I'm a terrible mother and don't deserve to have my son etc etc. I feel like if you genuinely want to help you give information to help the person change their mind. It frustrates me because when i looked for help i was just put down for even considering either option. I just get annoyed with both sides using reasoning that isn't solid or worth being put in an argument based on solid facts. I have seen both sides use reasoning that hasn't been 100% proven by science etc. its a hard decision to make and i feel like if a person really wanted to help other people and change their minds there would be less trying to make people feel like crappy parents.
Please don't think i am trying to single anyone out or that i am aiming this in one direction or the other. I am still researching and haven't made a decision as to what i want to do. I was just stating in general with most of the forums that i have seen in general not just on this site. I was simply putting my feelings on here with a few examples of things i have read. Im sorry if it came off that i was attempting to single anyone out or that i was saying no one provided information. I now it isn't the responsibility of a poster to give information with facts but if you are genuinely trying to help people change their minds then information would be given. Again not directed towards everyone. I know when i looked for help in finding actual factual information all i got was how if i do it I'm a terrible mother and don't deserve to have my son etc etc. I feel like if you genuinely want to help you give information to help the person change their mind. It frustrates me because when i looked for help i was just put down for even considering either option. I just get annoyed with both sides using reasoning that isn't solid or worth being put in an argument based on solid facts. I have seen both sides use reasoning that hasn't been 100% proven by science etc. its a hard decision to make and i feel like if a person really wanted to help other people and change their minds there would be less trying to make people feel like crappy parents.
@twogirlsandagreen I've been with a male, 27 who still had his foreskin intact and he had erectile dysfunction bad .. I later found out he used to be a bad coke head, and in return it messed with his sexual function. I think it would depend on the person as well, and any family history or ED or very heavy drug usage like in his case.
@amberrmariee20 I dont think @twogirlsandagreen was trying to imply that if a man isnt circumcised he wont get erectile dysfunction. The linked article talks about a severely increased chance of developing it, it doesnt imply that a man can't still be unlucky and get it through other means.
I applaud any parent who researches. Even if ultimately the make a choice i disagree with so do not feel like you need to apologize @FirstTimeMamaAricka . And i think sexual topics come up because that is most of our experience with a penis until we have sons. And it's not something to leave out of the decision.
@amberrmariee20 I dont think @twogirlsandagreen was trying to imply that if a man isnt circumcised he wont get erectile dysfunction. The linked article talks about a severely increased chance of developing it, it doesnt imply that a man can't still be unlucky and get it through other means.
I know ! But there's lots of factors that need to be put into what actually causes ED, the top 7 are in the link posted !
@amberrmariee20 I dont think @twogirlsandagreen was trying to imply that if a man isnt circumcised he wont get erectile dysfunction. The linked article talks about a severely increased chance of developing it, it doesnt imply that a man can't still be unlucky and get it through other means.
I know ! But there's lots of factors that need to be put into what actually causes ED, the top 7 are in the link posted !
@amberrmariee20 The screen shot of that study you posted is about ADULT male circumcision, not the impact of infant circumcision, therefore completely irrelevant. And for the record, any grown man who decides to undergo circumcision has pretty much anyone's support, as it is their decision at that point. Babies can't choose for their parents to alter their bodies or leave their bodies alone.
And of course there are other factors, which is why in tact males can still get ED. Circumcised males are simply 4.5 times more likely to get it than in tact makes, all other factors being equal.
Re: To circumcise? Not to not ??? Thoughts??
Also, the circumcision rate for our generation was high (like 80%). Now it's down to around 30-40%, so males of this generation will not be "different" anymore if they are left intact.
This is me !! My bf now is the only one who was circumsized ! I was scared to touch him at first.
LOL I laughed at your post ! " looks like they have a tiny erection all the time" !
Haha the way you put it made me giggle !
Agreed. My husband is uncircumcised and has never had a problem with this with daily cleansing. Like @komorebi wrote, maybe there's an underlying issue for the odor? We won't be circumcising our son. To DH, this has nothing to do with his son having a similar-looking penis as his, he and I both did our research and spoke with our doctor and don't deem this a necessary procedure.
I would certainly hope that's not true! That's just.so.gross.
I usually tend to not comment on circ threads just because I think it's such a personal decision BUT I can say I have never seen the "it makes washing easier" as a true reason. I would hope people are not using that as their sole reasoning anyways. The biggest reason I usually see is that they want their child to be the same as the father.
Now, I don't really understand the continued practice of circumcision for cosmetic reasons. Penises are kinda ugly, IMO. So are labia. But I'm not planning on having labiaplasty to make mine prettier. If it was a legitimate hygiene issue, that would be a different story.
Oh and before becoming a mom, I didn't know that baby boys actually get erections, often right before they pee all over you. That was a little startling to see the first time.
I just wanted to throw this out there, today the Catholic Church doesn't care whether or not you circumcise your son. It's the parent's decision from what I've read and been told.
I usually tend to not comment on circ threads just because I think it's such a personal decision BUT I can say I have never seen the "it makes washing easier" as a true reason. I would hope people are not using that as their sole reasoning anyways. The biggest reason I usually see is that they want their child to be the same as the father.
Another reason a lot of people circumsize is to prevent phimosis, and prevent frenulum tearing and further surgeries !
I ripped my exs frenulum, and it wouldn't heal properly so they put him in for surgery I'm guessing it was the frenuloplasty you mentioned. But his continued to be super tight and sensitive afterwards... Not sure if he still has issues with it but once it ripped it was never the same as he said !
I seen 2 penis with phimosis and omg nasty is all I can say ! It was traumatizing to think what is under there !!
My pediatrician told me not to pull my sons foreskin back until after age 2 ! So until age 2 we didn't pull it back at all, he's almost 4 now and he doesn't mind having it pulled back and cleaned ! He was left uncircumsized because he had other health issues going on at birth and another surgery would of been too much for him !
Clean your parts ya'll. @bucher1s
There is no procedure done without risks. Baby boys die from the procedure in the United states, and many more are harmed.
I'm just glad it's not as popular today as it was. It's a culturally engrained traditionand as less people opt for it andthe boys grow up just fine then justifications will seem more and more rediculous.
The thing that I am most confused by when people claim medical reasons for infant circumcision is that there have been no studies proving that there is a medical benefit. There only "may" be a benefit. So we know there are definitely drawbacks to circ, and there are only MAYBE benefits that the medical community has thus far been unable to prove (so, then are there truly? Thinking no, since science can't back it up).
I attached the information from the doctor about Infant circumcision, and even in there it states: "however, at the present time, there is not enough information to recommend routine newborn circumcision for health reasons."
So a practice that has been going on for as long as it has is yet been able to show any health benefits for it. Interesting, no? Yes, it makes hygiene easier, but that is truly about it. It is basically done for religious reasons (totally understandable), cosmetic (aka to look like dad), or for unprovable medical reasons. You would THINK people would need more cold hard facts to allow their child to suffer genital mutilation, but it is just so normalized in our society. Like female genital mutilation is ingrained in some other societies.
The whole thing is just really quite sad. I am married to a circumcised man, who is very well educated, is the CEO of a very large company, is very opinionated, and is hard to convince to change his mind. He wanted to get our son circumcised. I gave him the research from both sides without interjecting my opinion in any way. After reading it, he told me that he felt it would be best to leave our son in tact (I was so relieved). So he is an example of a father supporting a change in the norm for the sake of his child's health. I honestly think the practice will become less and less common, especially once insurance drops the procedure from coverage and moves it to the "elective cosmetic" category. Insurance is on the way there already because there has been no scientific evidence to support the claims of medical benefits.
All of my friends with sons have had them circumcised and 100% of them did it so that their boys will look like daddy (cosmetic). Several of their boys have had to undergo revisions, or will undergo revisions soon because of complications. One even got a bad infection from his circ. I totally support them in doing what they feel is best, it just always breaks my heart that they don't ever seem to take the time to research such a hugely important decision. Ethically, it should be up to the person being altered since foreskin can never be put back on.
https://www.academia.edu/6395137/Adding_Insult_to_Injury_Acquisition_of_Erectile_Dysfunction_from_Circumcision
I think it would depend on the person as well, and any family history or ED or very heavy drug usage like in his case.
https://www.healthline.com/health/erectile-dysfunction/common-causes-impotence#Cardiac5
And here's another acticle I read on !
@amberrmariee20 The screen shot of that study you posted is about ADULT male circumcision, not the impact of infant circumcision, therefore completely irrelevant. And for the record, any grown man who decides to undergo circumcision has pretty much anyone's support, as it is their decision at that point. Babies can't choose for their parents to alter their bodies or leave their bodies alone.
And of course there are other factors, which is why in tact males can still get ED. Circumcised males are simply 4.5 times more likely to get it than in tact makes, all other factors being equal.