To circumsize my child, or not to, that... is the question

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

Whatever you decide don't base the decision on what Penn & Teller think...jeez :rolleyes.

Personally I think the benefits outweigh the risks.

I've never known a girl who didn't think an uncircumcised penis was gross.

---

There has actually been very little scientific research on this to my knowledge, and my wife and I did do a fairly thorough look through of the REAL evidence (the source studies, not what some jackass wrote about something he saw on a website run by some guy who he heard knew something about medicine) at the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

So it's ok to beat a baby too, since they won't remember it.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Oooh man this will draw out more heated debate than one would imagine.

My wife and I decided not to do so for either of our boys. (3 and 6 yrs)

Looking back now, subjecting them to the procedure would have been needlessly cruel, and we do not regret the decision in the slightest.

They are just fine, happy and healthy.

I figure if they ever grow up and really want to do the procedure themselves, they are free to do so, but it seems to be a decision for them, and not for us to make.

Just my 2 cents.

---

lol! no man would willingly subject himself to such a procedure.

It's either baby or bust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

There has actually been very little scientific research on this to my knowledge, and my wife and I did do a fairly thorough look through of the REAL evidence (the source studies, not what some jackass wrote about something he saw on a website run by some guy who he heard knew something about medicine) at the time.

---

Have you ever found anything to corroborate the point 101A made about decreased pleasure with the foreskin removed? That was a major point Penn & Teller made on their show, but testimony from one couple is hardly convincing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SonOfAGun

lol! no man would willingly subject himself to such a procedure.

---

I think Abraham did it himself, without anesthetic. I would totally respect a dudes covenant with God in that case. Otherwise it just seems to be a cash cow for môhels and hospitals.

But you are the parents, so it's up to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4cc

you named him devin?

might as well cut his whole dick off

---

He's also going to be a Celtics fan... Circumcision is probably the least of the kid's problems...

:lol

it's been proven that circumcised men have less sexual pleasure than uncircumsized one.
But you are the parents, it's your choice.

i cant believe this a thread

i would say yes because of the smegma factor, if anyone was ever to leak that secret to your friends

thats a lifetime of ruthless regulation inflicted upon you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Have you ever found anything to corroborate the point 101A made about decreased pleasure with the foreskin removed? That was a major point Penn & Teller made on their show, but testimony from one couple is hardly convincing.

---

I would simply think that because there's more skin then there'd be more size. More size would mean more pleasure.

I'd think that since ribbed condoms (for her pleasure) are based off an uncircumsized penis that would point towards that being true.

i wonder what argentina and esmegmol think about this?

I would figure that the majority of the international fans here are not circumcized.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ploto

i would figure that the majority of the international fans here are not circumcized.

---

+1

If it isn't a religious thing, and you don't think the HIV stuff would be relevant to your kid (teach him safe sex) than I see no reason to do it.

If you choose to, find the most experienced Moyl you can find (most Doctors know who they are in the area) and do it while the child is very young...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SonOfAGun

lol! no man would willingly subject himself to such a procedure.

It's either baby or bust.

---

Don't Muslims elect circumcision at 12ish/13ish?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

It's an ambiguous gender name actually. And it's Irish, as I am. It was either that or Brady.

---

Oh &$%#@ reminds me of that article of those parents in Sweden that named their kid some "gender neutral" name and dressed "it" in clothes that you couldnt tell if it was a boy/girl. :bang

http://www.thelocal.se/20232/20090623/

A couple of Swedish parents have stirred up debate in the country by refusing to reveal whether their two-and-a-half-year-old child is a boy or a girl.

Pop’s parents [see footnote], both 24, made a decision when their baby was born to keep Pop’s sex a secret. Aside from a select few – those who have changed the child’s diaper – nobody knows Pop’s gender; if anyone enquires, Pop’s parents simply say they don’t disclose this information.

In an interview with newspaper Svenska Dagbladet in March, the parents were quoted saying their decision was rooted in the feminist philosophy that gender is a social construction.

“We want Pop to grow up more freely and avoid being forced into a specific gender mould from the outset,” Pop’s mother said. “It's cruel to bring a child into the world with a blue or pink stamp on their forehead.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PEP

Oh &$%#@ reminds me of that article of those parents in Sweden that named their kid some "gender neutral" name and dressed "it" in clothes that you couldnt tell if it was a boy/girl. :bang

http://www.thelocal.se/20232/20090623/

A couple of Swedish parents have stirred up debate in the country by refusing to reveal whether their two-and-a-half-year-old child is a boy or a girl.

Pop’s parents [see footnote], both 24, made a decision when their baby was born to keep Pop’s sex a secret. Aside from a select few – those who have changed the child’s diaper – nobody knows Pop’s gender; if anyone enquires, Pop’s parents simply say they don’t disclose this information.

In an interview with newspaper Svenska Dagbladet in March, the parents were quoted saying their decision was rooted in the feminist philosophy that gender is a social construction.

“We want Pop to grow up more freely and avoid being forced into a specific gender mould from the outset,” Pop’s mother said. “It's cruel to bring a child into the world with a blue or pink stamp on their forehead.”

---

This is a cool social experiment. Unfortunately, without many more subjects, it will just be a statistical anomaly.

I don't know what today's medical practices are, but to do it at 8 days old was once said to be the best time to have it done. It has to do with the immune system being at peak and healing faster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacobdrj

Don't Muslims elect circumcision at 12ish/13ish?

---

Damn. If they do, respect. That'll toughen you up quick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Have you ever found anything to corroborate the point 101A made about decreased pleasure with the foreskin removed? That was a major point Penn & Teller made on their show, but testimony from one couple is hardly convincing.

---

From my understanding, and obviously I'm not an expert, it's not so much that circumcision leads to decreased pleasure as it is that keeping the foreskin increases sensitivity and, therefore, leads to the potential for increased pleasure. If you're talking about pleasure for the person on the receiving end (and I'm guessing you're not), I really don't think it matters.

I did a quick survey of my female friends and they all agreed that the uncut penis is a major turn off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

There has actually been very little scientific research on this to my knowledge, and my wife and I did do a fairly thorough look through of the REAL evidence (the source studies, not what some jackass wrote about something he saw on a website run by some guy who he heard knew something about medicine) at the time.

---

The info I posted is not from some random website. The first is from the mayo clinic and is quite measured in listing the possible pros/cons. It does state up front...

Quote:

---

In 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued a policy statement that says the benefits aren't strong enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns.

---

Maybe you didn't actually read it.

The second is a REAL study from the New England Journal of Medicine. It has REAL numbers from the study. Maybe you didn't actually read it.

So no need to be a jackass.

I love the whole "lost sensitivity" argument. Does that organ really need MORE sensitivity?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

I love the whole "lost sensitivity" argument. Does that organ really need MORE sensitivity?

---

3 pump chump, eh?

Do it, it's a lot easier to clean and your wife isn't going to want to pull it back to get in and clean it when he's young.

I would say the child has no rights as an individual. It is totally reliant on the mother to live and isn't really aware of what is going on. A newborn is just a dumb as an adult dog. It takes some months before things like individualism and independence form, after which they have real rights.

It sounds worse than it is, but it's true. A newborn doesn't have personhood yet. Given that, the decision is totally yours.

I would do the cut if you're in the states so the kid doesn't feel weird when he finds out everyone in gym class looks different than him. Same thing going into adult life and dating.

Also, beating your child is obviously not OK because they won't remember it. That would leave obvious physical and psychological scars. The kid might not remember the situation, but people are going to question what's up when he cowers in a corner at the sight of his parents.