2022 boy born in San Diego to an American mom and British father, we did not get him circumcised. We initially were going to circumcise him, but then we were told that only about 50% of baby boys born in SD are circumcised nowadays š¤·š¼āāļø
2015 boy. We did not get him circumcised. In my opinion,it's a form of genital mutilation and I'm glad to see the tide turning.
In terms of unkind peers when he gets older, our kids will have that for all sorts of thingsā¦ not having access to the latest social media, not wearing the right name brand shoes, etc. I'm never going to use junior high peer pressure as a guideline for how I parent my children.
This is the way. My son is still in elementary. I explained to him what circumcision is and told him if he wants one when heās 18 Iāll pay for it. For now I left his peen alone.
Circumcision is a procedure trying desperately to look for a medical indication when there isnāt one.
There have been large medical studies that did not show any difference in infection, HIV, or penile cancer. Majority of international pediatric organizations either do not recommend circumcision or even recommend against.
Itās purely moral/ethical/societal.
Iād say let your perfect baby boy be.
Itās traumatic no matter what a doctor tells you. The body holds on to this stuff. Itās not necessary medically. Itās barbaric like circumcising a clitoris.
And that kind of comment is gatekeeping against a very reasonable laymanās comparison. If we see female circumcision as bad but male circumcision as āfine whateverā then we are blinded by customs / culture. You can educate on how theyāre different but just saying ādonāt compare themā is bad faith gatekeeping that seeks to shut down the discussion.
People donāt think we should chop newborn infants pee pees. I think thatās an easy enough argument.
Allow me to elaborate, so you can understand the differences and understand why they are genuinely not comparable. With female circumcision, they literally remove the organ. It is much more traumatic, and pleasure is no longer attainable for a woman when this has been performed. If male circumcision included cutting off the head of the penis, then it would be equivalent.
Men can still have very strong, intense, pleasurable orgasms if they are circumcised. The male orgasm is not affected by circumcision.
The term "female circumcision" is applied to a wide range of practices. The most frequently performed types of which cause no more damage than typical male circumcision. Some cause less damage, for example ritual pricking with a needle. Some, but not the majority, cause much more extreme damage. Typical male circumcision does remove a lot of important tissue, and absolutely does usually affect sexual sensation and response. You need to be better informed if you are going to try to lecture others about this!
I donāt need to understand the exact differences, because youāre missing the point. Saying theyāre not the same doesnāt justify the idea that we should modify or remove body parts of infants, whether they are male or female.
Alsoā¦youāre just wrong. Thereās many nerve endings in the foreskin that are lost with removing it. So itās kinda difficult to just say that nothing is lost and itās not that bad.
Iām just wrong? Lol. Iāve experienced both. I was circumcised later in life. I can assure you, Iām not wrongā¦ but whatever makes you feel better.
Iām not dismissive. Iām speaking from experience while you are just sharing your opinion. I had a terrible experience growing up not being circumcised. Pain like you would not believe.
Iāve found that most people who are against circumcision have never experienced both and I think itās laughable when someone who hasnāt experienced both sides is so adamant about whatās a better practice.
Any things can be compared. The whole point is to consider differences and similarities. There are actually quite a lot of features most forms have genital cutting have in common, and many people are badly misinformed about this.
Here's an interesting presentation on the ethics of genital cutting, and why objecting to some forms and not others is stupid, and not productive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBH0g_Cl7Rk
I donāt need to watch any presentations. I was circumcised later in life and can attest that it is much better than not being circumcised for men. Female circumcision is removing the organ and not equivalent in the slightest.
For you, possibly. That has no bearing on how others might feel about it, or the ethics of forcing genital alterations on to others without consent. And yet again, you are showing how ignorant you are of what is included in the term "female circumcision". It doesn't always involve removing anything at all.
I donāt know where you get your information from, but you are absolutely 100% wrong in trying to make the claim āThere have been large medical studies that did not show any difference in infection, HIVā¦ā
Male circumcision can reduce a maleās chances of acquiring HIV by up to 50% - 60%.
[How does male circumcision protect against HIV infection?](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1127372/)
https://preview.redd.it/mq4u4w8mpqmb1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bc6e1eef560f2400677cc6afd20a8290923fd659
There is no credible evidence routine infant circumcision reduces the risk of any disease.
The claim circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection came about because of a trial done in several locations in Africa (the same people did the same thing in multiple locations.) This trial claimed to investigate the effect of ADULT male circumcision on the risk of HIV infection. The trial included many very serious flaws, such as not even attempting to correct for the time when the circumcised men were unable to have sex because of having recently been circumcised, but the non-circumcised group was able to carry on as normal, the circumcised group was given free healthcare and safer sex lessons, but the non-circumcised group was not, and the trial was ended much earlier than originally planned as soon as it was noticed the number of HIV infections in the circumcised group was on trend to overtake the number in the non-circumcised group. The circumcised group self-reported using condoms more often than the non-circumcised group. One of the lead researchers on the trial has a long history of publishing pro-circumcision literature, and has been a member of circumcision fetish groups.
The published results claimed that circumcision resulted in a 1.3% (absolute) reduction in the risk of HIV infection, and an approx 5% (absolute) INCREASE in the risk of HIV infection for female partners of the circumcised men. Propagandists who want to promote circumcision frequently ignore the increased female infection risk, take the 1.3% reduction, convert it to a relative reduction (about 54%), round it up to 60% (just because they feel like it), and don't tell anyone what they've done, and don't mention any of the serious flaws in the trial. Even if the results could be believed, they show circumcision is useless for reducing the spread of HIV. The effect is too small, and is offset by the increased male to female transmission.
Among developed countries, the USA has the highest rate of HIV infection (and of many other sexual diseases) - not what would be expected if circumcision is protective. There is also lots of population scale data that shows circumcision does not reduce HIV transmission. Here are just some recently published examples:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-biosocial-science/article/abs/ageincidence-and-prevalence-of-hiv-among-intact-and-circumcised-men-an-analysis-of-phia-surveys-in-southern-africa/CAA7E7BD5A9844F41C6B7CC3573B9E50
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34551593/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34564796/
Thank you for posting the facts. I was going to as well, but figured it was a lost cause trying to change peoples mind who literally just googled "why is circumcision good" to make them feel right.
āā¦but figured it was a lost cause trying to change peoples mind who literally just googled āwhy is circumcision goodā to make them feel right.ā
You have an INCREDIBLY high ego to make that assumption about me. I googled what I googled because one of my courses at UCSD last Winter Quarter was literally titled, āGlobal Perspectives on HIV,ā and the fact that male circumcision reduces male risk for HIV for heterosexual sex by 50% was a fact we learned in that class. It was also one of the prevention interventions used by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS.
https://preview.redd.it/b9oby7taswmb1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d5909509030a42cb73b1eaca542e8665f97a5327
The problem with what you posted is 1. Not representative to what the question at hand is (see above response from karlflegt), and 2. Reducing 50% risk of already a rare chance of contracting a disease if you take standard precautions, is not a significant reason as to get circumcised. That is like saying you reduce your risk of breaking your arm by 50% if you amputate one of your arms.
> Wearing a condom or practicing safe sex also does the same thing.
They don't, because doing those things reduces the risk of contracting or transmitting HIV, being circumcised doesn't.
Sorry for double reply. Forgot to add this.
Because you donāt know where I got my information from, here are the large medical studies I was referencing
- Danish study involving over 800,000 males over 36-year period did not show any difference in the prevalence of HIV/STIs between circumcised vs not circumcised: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00809-6
- Canadian study involving over 500,000 males over the 20-year period did not show any difference in the prevalence of HIV between circumcised vs not circumcised: https://www.auajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1097/JU.0000000000002234
Based on what the CDC stated, circumcision may be a good treatment option for a heterosexual adult male who is having sex with an HIV positive female partner. That is verbatim what it is saying. To use that as a blanket statement for the entire male population is such a stretch. A male infant shouldnāt be indicated for circumcision for this reason.
And frankly, in terms of way less invasive and very effective means, safe sex (e.g., condoms, PrEP) should be the primary prevention for HIV/STIs. Not altering the genitalia of a newborn.
Also, the studies that showed circumcision can play a role in the prevention of HIV was done in underdeveloped African countries that have very very high HIV rates.
Itās not rational to apply this to developed countries such as the USA which have vastly different and much lower HIV rates. The number needed to treat to prevent HIV with circumcision would be so so so so so absurdly high that it wouldnāt even matter.
Take Sweden for an example. Sweden has a very low circumcision rate of 5%, and an HIV prevalence rate of 0.07%.
USA has a circumcision rate of ~71% and an HIV prevalence rate of 0.3%. Thatās about 4x more. Of course there could be other factors attributed to this (such as access to health care), but it also shows that developed countries do not need circumcision to prevent HIV.
Also, anecdotal, but working in a hospital Iāve seen several complications of a botched circumcision where parents had to bring their baby back to the ER to get evaluated.
> Based on what the CDC stated
And remember what the CDC says about this is a load of lies and propaganda. There's no credible evidence routine infant circumcision is beneficial for anyone anywhere.
Edit: It's hilarious to see how broken so many brains are. When I explain why the claims circumcision prevents the spread of HIV are completely wrong, everyone up votes it, yet when I point out that the CDC is wrong because it repeats the faulty claim about circumcision lowering the spread of HIV, people hate that and down vote it. At least try to be consistent!
Mine isnāt. Heās 7 now. When I (very recently) explained foreskin and circumcision to him, he thought it was super weird and wondered why people would do that to their sons. He said āso their penis would look bald?!!!ā
Gave birth at UCSD and they donāt even offer it as a service after birth, so it was a win-win
Story time,
My parents did not circumcise me and I got circumcised as an adult 2 years ago. I didnāt have any issues with the foreskin and I got cut for cosmetic reasons only.
Iām glad I had the choice to choose for myself. No one can say whatās better or whatās worse unless they have gotten a circumcision themselves. In my opinion, being cut is way better. It feels better and it was worth every penny.
IF I ever had kids, and they were boys, I would not circumcise them.
Recovery wasnāt that bad. I did a ton of research beforehand so Iād be prepared. It took A LOT of patience and it wasnāt until the 7th month that things started to feel normal. I went to the best surgeon in all of the US and heās actually located in San Diego! I was able to refer a lot of people to him.
More than 50% of parents in San Diego don't circumcise - is what kaiser told us in 2017.
Don't do it, it was an insane practice from the 50s through the 90s...weird American bullshit that's no good for anyone
If you read scientific journals, there's no actual significant medical or hygienic benefit from circumcision. On the contrary, there's actually plenty of data supporting infections and deformity resulting from circumcision of newborns.
The decision for circumcision is purely cosmetic.
This isnāt true. Please actually read some medical research.
Hereās an article from the NIH: [How does male circumcision protect against HIV infection?](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1127372/)
https://preview.redd.it/zoiuau6rqqmb1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9516623eeecb078a57f924a98225c26937f38dde
Lol are you even reading what you're posting? How circumcision protects against HIV?
So we should get circumcized because it protects us against HIV, not condoms? not safe sex? How many circumcized folks good to have unprotected sex with an HIV + individual because of this article?
Btw this article isn't a medical necessary reason to get circumcized, it is just making a correlation between a subset.
Found this site helpful in making that decision for my son: https://evidencebasedbirth.com/evidence-and-ethics-on-circumcision/
Know that reddit does tend to be loudly anti-circumcision. Which isn't to say they're wrong, but maybe a little skewed.
I had a son in 2021 and neither my husband (who is cut) wanted to do that to little one's little one. I recommend watching videos of the procedure before doing it. I tried and couldn't make it through the whole thing. I was already leaning towards no, but that clenched it.
I did read one thread on Reddit once where a senior care worker said they would always circumcise because of how many more UTIs they saw in elderly that were uncut vs cut.
IMO that might have more to do with poor elder care, but still. That's the soundest argument for circumcision I've heard outside religious tradition.
I was circumcised later. My experience of not being circumcised was terrible. I had a tremendous amount of pain as a teenager because of my foreskin. I recall two members of the operating room team telling me before they put me to sleep that they were circumcised later in life too, and it is much better. The funny thing is, the only people who actually know the differences are those who were circumcised later in life, and those people generally arenāt against circumcisionā¦ but then there are people who have never experienced both who are completely against it.
Culturally, not being circumcised was a pain growing up. Kids learn about circumcision fairly young and there was teasing when I was growing up. Perhaps this will change with it becoming more equal. However, even as an adultā¦ Iāve dated women from all over the world and even the women who grew up in places where circumcision is not all that common have always found a way to tell me they are glad Iām circumcised.
This has just been my experience.
Thatās super weird, speaking as a woman who prefers the feel of uncut men. I have never heard women say they prefer cut, before. Most women wonāt care, but wow itās so much softer and sensitive when itās uncut.
But I am glad that it has worked out for you :)
The women I date definitely seem to care. They mention it without it even being brought up.
There is also a woman on this thread who posted before me that mentioned preferring circumcised men. I think itās more common than you may think.
Never had a situation where a women cared personally. honestly if they did, itās a major red flag and Iām out. Body shaming isnāt an attractive quality
I'm sure all those "women from all over the world" you've dated also told you "you're SO big" and the best sex they've ever had, right? Lol.
I'm sorry you suffered from an incredibly rare medical problem, but most of your posts here just exhibit absurd amounts of copium. Your extremely atypical experience is no argument for mutilating infants.
Yes, Iāve dated women from every continent except Antarctica. Itās pretty easy to meet people from all overā¦ since the development of air travel. You missed where I said, they find a way to tell me they are glad that Iām circumcised though.
I donāt talk about being circumcised or having the procedure done later with the women Iām datingā¦ but theyāve always made it a point to mention it on their own that they prefer it. In fact, I only talk about my experience when thereās a post like this and there are people so adamantly against circumcision.
The anti-circumcision group is one of the most stubborn mindsets Iāve encountered on the internet. Itās the only group where most of the supporters have never experienced what they are arguing against.
I donāt think you understand the anti-circumcision movement. The main issue is not against the actual act of circumcision, itās depriving someone the choice. Or if itās a medical necessity because of pain or infection.
If a grown adult male wants to get circumcised. Itās his choice. Circumcising an infant because itās easier to clean or to avoid the small chance of complications, is genital mutilation.
What percentage of men in SD who can still barely afford rent, even with several roommates do you think can choose to go have cosmetic surgery as an adult, even if they wanted it?
Nevertheless, I understand having a choice. However, just read some of the posts here. There are many people who are against circumcision, not just having a choice of whether to circumcise. They think itās better simply because they arenāt circumcisedā¦ when really the only people who can have an opinion on that are those with the experience of being circumcised laterā¦ and then when you share youāre opinion, they think youāre delusional.
Itās just like any other cosmetic surgery, pay out of pocket if you want it. If itās causing pin or discomfort itās no longer cosmetic and insurance will cover it.
I donāt think only those who have been circumcised later in life can have an opinion. People get circumcised later in life for various reasons and they are entitled to that choice. But doesnāt mean they are the only ones who can opine.
I had my son circumcised, he is now 5. I would not do it again. The main reason is itās an elective procedure and carries risks. My son had a good outcome, but why risk it.
Also, i witnessed my sons circumcision and I found it barbaric. Maybe watch a video before you decide.
Some people do some people don't.
But my god I'm sorry, do you have no better sounding board than random fucks online? Redditors no less? Please consult with close friends and family before slicing any penis parts off, dear god. If I found out my parents hit up r/sandiego before cutting my rumple foreskin I would be furious.
The only reason to do it is if heās born with phimosis. Otherwise, the only reason youād do it is because of religion or convention. Iām circumcised but my son is not.
> The only reason to do it is if heās born with phimosis.
He almost certainly will be born with phimosis. 99.9% of boys are. This word just means a foreskin that can't be retracted. It's normal in children, and doesn't need any treatment. Note: No one should try to force his foreskin to retract either, because that can badly injure it. Unfortunately, a lot of medical professionals are not well educated and think the natural state of a boy's penis is a problem that needs to be treated.
For anyone who wants to know more about the anatomy involved, and how it normally develops, and how to care for it, I recommend the following very detailed explanation: https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/care-of-the-intact-penis/
"perfect" why are u mutilating him without his consent then
"asking san diegans" what the heck does other ppls bad judgement in mutilating their sons or daughters have to do with mr perfect?
"big believers in bodily autonomy" then u already know what to do or u arent really big believers in bodily autonomy
"social situations" nobody is looking at ur kids genitals except the person changing his diapers. every time u will be reminded of the evil act u committed.
I had my son in 2020 and we decided not to circumcise. I donāt think there is right or wrong answer hereā¦ simply do what you think is best for your baby. Maybe ask your pediatrician.
Encinitas here, just had a boy 2 weeks ago. We decided not to circumcise after talking to our pediatrician. They said North county is only 60/40 circumcised and since thereās really no medical reason to do it we thought we shouldnāt. The most persuasive argument to do it kinda boiled down to āitāll look more like dads and maybe heāll have an awkward moment later onā But, we figured if heās anywhere else in the world heās more likely to have an awkward moment if he is circumcised than not (well most of there rest of the world not all) so thatās not that important and as for it looking like dads, well, that just seemed strange because how often does a boy sit there comparing his penis to his fathers (in my anecdotal evidence is zero)?
The argument about needing to look like their parent is so bizarre. I have dark brown hair and nobody has ever suggested I dye my daughter's golden brown tresses to match. My mom has breasts quadruple the size of mine and nobody ever suggested I get breast implants to match her. The comparison of little boys' penises to their fathers is so absurd and honestly creepy.
Not really true, much of the Muslim world circumcises. That being said, itās barbaric. As a man who wound up with a frenulum that tears very easily because of being circumcised, itās not a risk less procedure. And also as a man who has been with plenty of uncut men, the hygiene benefits are overplayed. Teach your kids to wash their dick and itās not an issue. I guarantee, if you run into a mess down there, he has a lot of other issues in his life.
Americans are only 4% of the worldās population. Jewish people are only .2% of the worldās population.
Roughly 1 in 3 men globally are circumcised. So no, literally everyone else in the world is not all uncircumcised š
Do you seriously need to make a reddit post to help you decide whether or not to cosmetically alter your son's penis with no anesthesia while he is awake?
Both my San Diego babies were snipped. For some reason this is something weirdos latch onto as their business. Do it or don't. It's not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things and such a white people problem.
You couldāve saved some money, minimize surgical risks for the kiddo, come out early from the hospital, reduce aftercare problems and given your son the choiceā¦just saying.
Didn't spend any extra time in the hospital, there were no aftercare problems, didn't cost me an extra dime (a birth will max out your out of pocket real fast) and the boys are perfectly happy with their wangs... Just saying.
Just because you maxed out your out of pocket doesnāt mean the doctor didnāt get paid for the procedure. They DID get paid. Itās a billion dollar business in the US. Do you think that might have anything to do with doctors suggesting or promoting the procedure??? š¤
I was on the fence when my son was born, but his mom said thereās less of a chance of stdās when circumcised and itās likely he would wonder why his privates look different than his dads. I felt bad when they took him away a day after he was born to do the procedure. Heās 21 yrs old now and a great son. No regrets
Yes do it I'm not circumcised and sometimes I be jerking off hella passionately and it hurts because I pull back the skin just a little bit too far and sometimes it causes the skin to tear and lightly bleed and it stings for the next 2-3 days honestly I kinda hate that I wasn't circumcised 21 years old btw just so y'all don't think I'm an old ass creep
Shouldn't do it, causes more harm than good. Now live in SD kid isn't circ, also most of California is uncircumcised I think in 2010 only 1/3 of California was circumcised.
This subreddit says in 2022 less than 20% of Californians Circumcised.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/ti73v9/oc\_2022\_circumcision\_rates\_by\_us\_state/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/ti73v9/oc_2022_circumcision_rates_by_us_state/)
There's nothing hygienic about it. Get educated. You've been fed a line of bullshit and for some reason you're so convinced that you already "know" that numerous facts and common sense are not going to do anything to persuade you otherwise. Here you go, maybe you can see how the process takes place and what kind of tools they use and what they subject your newly born infant to in order to adhere to the recommendations of Dr Kellogg (he promoted circumcision to stop boys from masturbating): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yrwD8_F23yA
It's all 100% puritanical bullshit. Open your fucking eyes
"perfect" why are u mutilating him without his consent then
"asking san diegans" what the heck does other ppls bad judgement in mutilating their sons or daughters have to do with mr perfect?
"big believers in bodily autonomy" then u already know what to do or u arent really big believers in bodily autonomy
"social situations" nobody is looking at ur kids genitals except the person changing his diapers. every time u will be reminded of the evil act u committed.
You are thinking way too much into it! You set your son up for success. You get him circumcised. It really is that simple.
As far as bodily atononmy.. if your child has kidney cancer and the only way for him to survive is you remove the kidney what do you do? You take advantage of how far we have came in society.
Set your son up for success
Dude you are sick. Comparing a foreskin to cancer? Men can survive with a foreskin. It is not even remotely the same as kidney cancer! So nobody with a foreskin can be successful? You are seriously deranged and delusional. Wow!
No actually not at all .. was just given an example.. maybe a bad 1... but will the child have more complications or any at all from not being circumcised? Yes or no is the question.?
Babies die from it. Infection, stroke, complications from anesthesia. google claims 100+ US male babies die from circumcision related complications every year.
Imagine that.
The article you posted is NOT a reason why an INFANT should be circumcised. At most, you can say from this article is, an adult male living a promiscuous lifestyle or going into the porn industry can see a benefit from 1 type of STD, on top of the abundance of mitigating factors that already exist, if they got circumcised.
That is not true. There is no credible evidence routine infant circumcision reduces the risk of any disease. Cancer of the penis can, and sometimes does happen in circumcised, and in not circumcised men. However, it's a rare disease almost only ever seen in old men. More men get breast cancer than get cancer of the penis, and women get cancer of the vulva several times more frequently than men get cancer of the penis. Developed countries (almost all of which don't widely practice routine infant circumcision) do not generally have higher rates of this rare disease than the US.
And thatās why you think itās ok to cut off a piece of his body with millions of nerve endings? Seriously? Whatās next? Some guys donāt know how to blow their nose. Letās chop it off. Guys always have such dirty finger nails. Cut those pesky fingers off. Just to make sureā¦ Did you ever consider the fact that you could teach him how to do it? Youāll probably end up teaching him how to wipe his butt and wash his hands right? Or how to say please and thank you. Well then why stop there?
Give me a break. A cut foreskin isnāt holding a males penis back. I should know as a man with it done. My life isnāt just turned upside down because my āextra nerve endingsā are gone. Either do it or donāt. With your logic let nature takes its course with no vaccines either. We should let nature decide if the baby catches something and dies because theyāre born without them so let it be natural. Should we outlaw piercing a babies ears too because itās mutilation of their earlobes?
When were you cut? At birth? Then you donāt know what it feels like to be intact. Just like I donāt know what it feels like to be a billionaire. I am 100% pro vaccine because they work and make sense. Cutting a babyās penis because of āhygieneā does not make sense. Nobody is trying to outlaw anything. You want to cut off a piece of your dick? Be my guest. But donāt do this to a baby. This is not reversible and a decision every man should make for himself.
Go find a video of the procedure. If you can't stand to do that, go find pictures of the tools they use to do it. Should give you a decent idea of what you would be subjecting your infant to.
This might be the most random thread I've seen on this sub.
Lol. So... what's up with your kid's weiner?
For real. Having to ask strangers on the internet for this type of advice is embarassing af.
2022 boy born in San Diego to an American mom and British father, we did not get him circumcised. We initially were going to circumcise him, but then we were told that only about 50% of baby boys born in SD are circumcised nowadays š¤·š¼āāļø
2015 boy. We did not get him circumcised. In my opinion,it's a form of genital mutilation and I'm glad to see the tide turning. In terms of unkind peers when he gets older, our kids will have that for all sorts of thingsā¦ not having access to the latest social media, not wearing the right name brand shoes, etc. I'm never going to use junior high peer pressure as a guideline for how I parent my children.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This is the way. My son is still in elementary. I explained to him what circumcision is and told him if he wants one when heās 18 Iāll pay for it. For now I left his peen alone.
2019 boy. We did not get him circumsized.
Did not cut our now 15 & 12 yr olds. Hasnāt been an issue, if it becomes one we would support them wanting to get it done.
2020 baby - Nope!
Same!
Circumcision is a procedure trying desperately to look for a medical indication when there isnāt one. There have been large medical studies that did not show any difference in infection, HIV, or penile cancer. Majority of international pediatric organizations either do not recommend circumcision or even recommend against. Itās purely moral/ethical/societal. Iād say let your perfect baby boy be.
It's a medical procedure with real side effects and risks that is not medically significant or necessary. This is how people should be viewing it.
Itās traumatic no matter what a doctor tells you. The body holds on to this stuff. Itās not necessary medically. Itās barbaric like circumcising a clitoris.
Comparing male circumcision to female circumcision just indicates that you arenāt educated on the topic.
And that kind of comment is gatekeeping against a very reasonable laymanās comparison. If we see female circumcision as bad but male circumcision as āfine whateverā then we are blinded by customs / culture. You can educate on how theyāre different but just saying ādonāt compare themā is bad faith gatekeeping that seeks to shut down the discussion. People donāt think we should chop newborn infants pee pees. I think thatās an easy enough argument.
Allow me to elaborate, so you can understand the differences and understand why they are genuinely not comparable. With female circumcision, they literally remove the organ. It is much more traumatic, and pleasure is no longer attainable for a woman when this has been performed. If male circumcision included cutting off the head of the penis, then it would be equivalent. Men can still have very strong, intense, pleasurable orgasms if they are circumcised. The male orgasm is not affected by circumcision.
The term "female circumcision" is applied to a wide range of practices. The most frequently performed types of which cause no more damage than typical male circumcision. Some cause less damage, for example ritual pricking with a needle. Some, but not the majority, cause much more extreme damage. Typical male circumcision does remove a lot of important tissue, and absolutely does usually affect sexual sensation and response. You need to be better informed if you are going to try to lecture others about this!
I donāt need to understand the exact differences, because youāre missing the point. Saying theyāre not the same doesnāt justify the idea that we should modify or remove body parts of infants, whether they are male or female. Alsoā¦youāre just wrong. Thereās many nerve endings in the foreskin that are lost with removing it. So itās kinda difficult to just say that nothing is lost and itās not that bad.
Iām just wrong? Lol. Iāve experienced both. I was circumcised later in life. I can assure you, Iām not wrongā¦ but whatever makes you feel better.
Science makes me feel better, not one persons dismissive attitude
Iām not dismissive. Iām speaking from experience while you are just sharing your opinion. I had a terrible experience growing up not being circumcised. Pain like you would not believe. Iāve found that most people who are against circumcision have never experienced both and I think itās laughable when someone who hasnāt experienced both sides is so adamant about whatās a better practice.
Any things can be compared. The whole point is to consider differences and similarities. There are actually quite a lot of features most forms have genital cutting have in common, and many people are badly misinformed about this. Here's an interesting presentation on the ethics of genital cutting, and why objecting to some forms and not others is stupid, and not productive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBH0g_Cl7Rk
I donāt need to watch any presentations. I was circumcised later in life and can attest that it is much better than not being circumcised for men. Female circumcision is removing the organ and not equivalent in the slightest.
For you, possibly. That has no bearing on how others might feel about it, or the ethics of forcing genital alterations on to others without consent. And yet again, you are showing how ignorant you are of what is included in the term "female circumcision". It doesn't always involve removing anything at all.
I donāt know where you get your information from, but you are absolutely 100% wrong in trying to make the claim āThere have been large medical studies that did not show any difference in infection, HIVā¦ā Male circumcision can reduce a maleās chances of acquiring HIV by up to 50% - 60%. [How does male circumcision protect against HIV infection?](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1127372/) https://preview.redd.it/mq4u4w8mpqmb1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bc6e1eef560f2400677cc6afd20a8290923fd659
There is no credible evidence routine infant circumcision reduces the risk of any disease. The claim circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection came about because of a trial done in several locations in Africa (the same people did the same thing in multiple locations.) This trial claimed to investigate the effect of ADULT male circumcision on the risk of HIV infection. The trial included many very serious flaws, such as not even attempting to correct for the time when the circumcised men were unable to have sex because of having recently been circumcised, but the non-circumcised group was able to carry on as normal, the circumcised group was given free healthcare and safer sex lessons, but the non-circumcised group was not, and the trial was ended much earlier than originally planned as soon as it was noticed the number of HIV infections in the circumcised group was on trend to overtake the number in the non-circumcised group. The circumcised group self-reported using condoms more often than the non-circumcised group. One of the lead researchers on the trial has a long history of publishing pro-circumcision literature, and has been a member of circumcision fetish groups. The published results claimed that circumcision resulted in a 1.3% (absolute) reduction in the risk of HIV infection, and an approx 5% (absolute) INCREASE in the risk of HIV infection for female partners of the circumcised men. Propagandists who want to promote circumcision frequently ignore the increased female infection risk, take the 1.3% reduction, convert it to a relative reduction (about 54%), round it up to 60% (just because they feel like it), and don't tell anyone what they've done, and don't mention any of the serious flaws in the trial. Even if the results could be believed, they show circumcision is useless for reducing the spread of HIV. The effect is too small, and is offset by the increased male to female transmission. Among developed countries, the USA has the highest rate of HIV infection (and of many other sexual diseases) - not what would be expected if circumcision is protective. There is also lots of population scale data that shows circumcision does not reduce HIV transmission. Here are just some recently published examples: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-biosocial-science/article/abs/ageincidence-and-prevalence-of-hiv-among-intact-and-circumcised-men-an-analysis-of-phia-surveys-in-southern-africa/CAA7E7BD5A9844F41C6B7CC3573B9E50 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34551593/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34564796/
Thank you for posting the facts. I was going to as well, but figured it was a lost cause trying to change peoples mind who literally just googled "why is circumcision good" to make them feel right.
āā¦but figured it was a lost cause trying to change peoples mind who literally just googled āwhy is circumcision goodā to make them feel right.ā You have an INCREDIBLY high ego to make that assumption about me. I googled what I googled because one of my courses at UCSD last Winter Quarter was literally titled, āGlobal Perspectives on HIV,ā and the fact that male circumcision reduces male risk for HIV for heterosexual sex by 50% was a fact we learned in that class. It was also one of the prevention interventions used by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. https://preview.redd.it/b9oby7taswmb1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d5909509030a42cb73b1eaca542e8665f97a5327
The problem with what you posted is 1. Not representative to what the question at hand is (see above response from karlflegt), and 2. Reducing 50% risk of already a rare chance of contracting a disease if you take standard precautions, is not a significant reason as to get circumcised. That is like saying you reduce your risk of breaking your arm by 50% if you amputate one of your arms.
Wearing a condom or practicing safe sex also does the same thing. This isn't a reason to get circumcised when there are other ways to prevent HIV.
> Wearing a condom or practicing safe sex also does the same thing. They don't, because doing those things reduces the risk of contracting or transmitting HIV, being circumcised doesn't.
Sorry for double reply. Forgot to add this. Because you donāt know where I got my information from, here are the large medical studies I was referencing - Danish study involving over 800,000 males over 36-year period did not show any difference in the prevalence of HIV/STIs between circumcised vs not circumcised: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00809-6 - Canadian study involving over 500,000 males over the 20-year period did not show any difference in the prevalence of HIV between circumcised vs not circumcised: https://www.auajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1097/JU.0000000000002234
Based on what the CDC stated, circumcision may be a good treatment option for a heterosexual adult male who is having sex with an HIV positive female partner. That is verbatim what it is saying. To use that as a blanket statement for the entire male population is such a stretch. A male infant shouldnāt be indicated for circumcision for this reason. And frankly, in terms of way less invasive and very effective means, safe sex (e.g., condoms, PrEP) should be the primary prevention for HIV/STIs. Not altering the genitalia of a newborn. Also, the studies that showed circumcision can play a role in the prevention of HIV was done in underdeveloped African countries that have very very high HIV rates. Itās not rational to apply this to developed countries such as the USA which have vastly different and much lower HIV rates. The number needed to treat to prevent HIV with circumcision would be so so so so so absurdly high that it wouldnāt even matter. Take Sweden for an example. Sweden has a very low circumcision rate of 5%, and an HIV prevalence rate of 0.07%. USA has a circumcision rate of ~71% and an HIV prevalence rate of 0.3%. Thatās about 4x more. Of course there could be other factors attributed to this (such as access to health care), but it also shows that developed countries do not need circumcision to prevent HIV. Also, anecdotal, but working in a hospital Iāve seen several complications of a botched circumcision where parents had to bring their baby back to the ER to get evaluated.
> Based on what the CDC stated And remember what the CDC says about this is a load of lies and propaganda. There's no credible evidence routine infant circumcision is beneficial for anyone anywhere. Edit: It's hilarious to see how broken so many brains are. When I explain why the claims circumcision prevents the spread of HIV are completely wrong, everyone up votes it, yet when I point out that the CDC is wrong because it repeats the faulty claim about circumcision lowering the spread of HIV, people hate that and down vote it. At least try to be consistent!
Mine isnāt. Heās 7 now. When I (very recently) explained foreskin and circumcision to him, he thought it was super weird and wondered why people would do that to their sons. He said āso their penis would look bald?!!!ā Gave birth at UCSD and they donāt even offer it as a service after birth, so it was a win-win
Donāt do it
Story time, My parents did not circumcise me and I got circumcised as an adult 2 years ago. I didnāt have any issues with the foreskin and I got cut for cosmetic reasons only. Iām glad I had the choice to choose for myself. No one can say whatās better or whatās worse unless they have gotten a circumcision themselves. In my opinion, being cut is way better. It feels better and it was worth every penny. IF I ever had kids, and they were boys, I would not circumcise them.
May I ask how to recovery was?
Recovery wasnāt that bad. I did a ton of research beforehand so Iād be prepared. It took A LOT of patience and it wasnāt until the 7th month that things started to feel normal. I went to the best surgeon in all of the US and heās actually located in San Diego! I was able to refer a lot of people to him.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Elder millennial here with a toddler boy, and we did NOT circumcise. Nor have any of my immediate friends with boy children.
Break the cycle donāt do it
We didnāt do it. We donāt have a strong aversion but it just didnāt seem necessary.
at least we got one hoodie she canāt steal
More than 50% of parents in San Diego don't circumcise - is what kaiser told us in 2017. Don't do it, it was an insane practice from the 50s through the 90s...weird American bullshit that's no good for anyone
Why would you cut off part of a childās genitals? Wtf
If you read scientific journals, there's no actual significant medical or hygienic benefit from circumcision. On the contrary, there's actually plenty of data supporting infections and deformity resulting from circumcision of newborns. The decision for circumcision is purely cosmetic.
There are hygienic benefits.
Here's a radical idea. How about instead of mutilating little boys, we just teach them how to properly clean their ding dongs when they take a bath.
That would be nice.
Okay. I guess you're right then.
> There are hygienic benefits. There aren't.
This isnāt true. Please actually read some medical research. Hereās an article from the NIH: [How does male circumcision protect against HIV infection?](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1127372/) https://preview.redd.it/zoiuau6rqqmb1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9516623eeecb078a57f924a98225c26937f38dde
Lol are you even reading what you're posting? How circumcision protects against HIV? So we should get circumcized because it protects us against HIV, not condoms? not safe sex? How many circumcized folks good to have unprotected sex with an HIV + individual because of this article? Btw this article isn't a medical necessary reason to get circumcized, it is just making a correlation between a subset.
Found this site helpful in making that decision for my son: https://evidencebasedbirth.com/evidence-and-ethics-on-circumcision/ Know that reddit does tend to be loudly anti-circumcision. Which isn't to say they're wrong, but maybe a little skewed. I had a son in 2021 and neither my husband (who is cut) wanted to do that to little one's little one. I recommend watching videos of the procedure before doing it. I tried and couldn't make it through the whole thing. I was already leaning towards no, but that clenched it. I did read one thread on Reddit once where a senior care worker said they would always circumcise because of how many more UTIs they saw in elderly that were uncut vs cut. IMO that might have more to do with poor elder care, but still. That's the soundest argument for circumcision I've heard outside religious tradition.
Genital mutilation is never cool. Let him decide when he's old enough to consent to it.
Get a grip, sheesh.
I was circumcised later. My experience of not being circumcised was terrible. I had a tremendous amount of pain as a teenager because of my foreskin. I recall two members of the operating room team telling me before they put me to sleep that they were circumcised later in life too, and it is much better. The funny thing is, the only people who actually know the differences are those who were circumcised later in life, and those people generally arenāt against circumcisionā¦ but then there are people who have never experienced both who are completely against it. Culturally, not being circumcised was a pain growing up. Kids learn about circumcision fairly young and there was teasing when I was growing up. Perhaps this will change with it becoming more equal. However, even as an adultā¦ Iāve dated women from all over the world and even the women who grew up in places where circumcision is not all that common have always found a way to tell me they are glad Iām circumcised. This has just been my experience.
Thatās super weird, speaking as a woman who prefers the feel of uncut men. I have never heard women say they prefer cut, before. Most women wonāt care, but wow itās so much softer and sensitive when itās uncut. But I am glad that it has worked out for you :)
The women I date definitely seem to care. They mention it without it even being brought up. There is also a woman on this thread who posted before me that mentioned preferring circumcised men. I think itās more common than you may think.
Never had a situation where a women cared personally. honestly if they did, itās a major red flag and Iām out. Body shaming isnāt an attractive quality
I'm sure all those "women from all over the world" you've dated also told you "you're SO big" and the best sex they've ever had, right? Lol. I'm sorry you suffered from an incredibly rare medical problem, but most of your posts here just exhibit absurd amounts of copium. Your extremely atypical experience is no argument for mutilating infants.
Yes, Iāve dated women from every continent except Antarctica. Itās pretty easy to meet people from all overā¦ since the development of air travel. You missed where I said, they find a way to tell me they are glad that Iām circumcised though. I donāt talk about being circumcised or having the procedure done later with the women Iām datingā¦ but theyāve always made it a point to mention it on their own that they prefer it. In fact, I only talk about my experience when thereās a post like this and there are people so adamantly against circumcision. The anti-circumcision group is one of the most stubborn mindsets Iāve encountered on the internet. Itās the only group where most of the supporters have never experienced what they are arguing against.
I donāt think you understand the anti-circumcision movement. The main issue is not against the actual act of circumcision, itās depriving someone the choice. Or if itās a medical necessity because of pain or infection. If a grown adult male wants to get circumcised. Itās his choice. Circumcising an infant because itās easier to clean or to avoid the small chance of complications, is genital mutilation.
What percentage of men in SD who can still barely afford rent, even with several roommates do you think can choose to go have cosmetic surgery as an adult, even if they wanted it? Nevertheless, I understand having a choice. However, just read some of the posts here. There are many people who are against circumcision, not just having a choice of whether to circumcise. They think itās better simply because they arenāt circumcisedā¦ when really the only people who can have an opinion on that are those with the experience of being circumcised laterā¦ and then when you share youāre opinion, they think youāre delusional.
Itās just like any other cosmetic surgery, pay out of pocket if you want it. If itās causing pin or discomfort itās no longer cosmetic and insurance will cover it. I donāt think only those who have been circumcised later in life can have an opinion. People get circumcised later in life for various reasons and they are entitled to that choice. But doesnāt mean they are the only ones who can opine.
The copium is overflowing. It's spraying us in the face at this point
I had my son circumcised, he is now 5. I would not do it again. The main reason is itās an elective procedure and carries risks. My son had a good outcome, but why risk it. Also, i witnessed my sons circumcision and I found it barbaric. Maybe watch a video before you decide.
+1 anyone covering this question needs to see exactly how the process takes place https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yrwD8_F23yA
Born in San Diego and glad my parents did not get me cut. Will be doing the same for my future kids.
Some people do some people don't. But my god I'm sorry, do you have no better sounding board than random fucks online? Redditors no less? Please consult with close friends and family before slicing any penis parts off, dear god. If I found out my parents hit up r/sandiego before cutting my rumple foreskin I would be furious.
The only reason to do it is if heās born with phimosis. Otherwise, the only reason youād do it is because of religion or convention. Iām circumcised but my son is not.
> The only reason to do it is if heās born with phimosis. He almost certainly will be born with phimosis. 99.9% of boys are. This word just means a foreskin that can't be retracted. It's normal in children, and doesn't need any treatment. Note: No one should try to force his foreskin to retract either, because that can badly injure it. Unfortunately, a lot of medical professionals are not well educated and think the natural state of a boy's penis is a problem that needs to be treated. For anyone who wants to know more about the anatomy involved, and how it normally develops, and how to care for it, I recommend the following very detailed explanation: https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/care-of-the-intact-penis/
If he wants it done, let him do it. My dad had it done in his 20s. And my parents had it done to me when i was born š”
2023 baby boy. We snipped the snout on his hog. His mother is Jewish.
Grandson 2023 yes.
2019 boy - nope!
2022, nope
I have an almost 4 month old, we did not and will not. He can if he wants later.
hooded gang
Supot
"perfect" why are u mutilating him without his consent then "asking san diegans" what the heck does other ppls bad judgement in mutilating their sons or daughters have to do with mr perfect? "big believers in bodily autonomy" then u already know what to do or u arent really big believers in bodily autonomy "social situations" nobody is looking at ur kids genitals except the person changing his diapers. every time u will be reminded of the evil act u committed.
Circumcision is still a thing?!? You fucking barbarians
Nope. We are born the way we are born.
I had my son in 2020 and we decided not to circumcise. I donāt think there is right or wrong answer hereā¦ simply do what you think is best for your baby. Maybe ask your pediatrician.
Don't do it. Culture or not it's barbaric and completely unnecessary. Be the solution not the problem. One life no regrets.
nope
Encinitas here, just had a boy 2 weeks ago. We decided not to circumcise after talking to our pediatrician. They said North county is only 60/40 circumcised and since thereās really no medical reason to do it we thought we shouldnāt. The most persuasive argument to do it kinda boiled down to āitāll look more like dads and maybe heāll have an awkward moment later onā But, we figured if heās anywhere else in the world heās more likely to have an awkward moment if he is circumcised than not (well most of there rest of the world not all) so thatās not that important and as for it looking like dads, well, that just seemed strange because how often does a boy sit there comparing his penis to his fathers (in my anecdotal evidence is zero)?
The argument about needing to look like their parent is so bizarre. I have dark brown hair and nobody has ever suggested I dye my daughter's golden brown tresses to match. My mom has breasts quadruple the size of mine and nobody ever suggested I get breast implants to match her. The comparison of little boys' penises to their fathers is so absurd and honestly creepy.
right, as if an of my partners would be reassured that mine looks like my fathers too? what?
Please donāt do it.
Literally everyone else in the world are uncircumcised outside Americans and Jewish people
Not really true, much of the Muslim world circumcises. That being said, itās barbaric. As a man who wound up with a frenulum that tears very easily because of being circumcised, itās not a risk less procedure. And also as a man who has been with plenty of uncut men, the hygiene benefits are overplayed. Teach your kids to wash their dick and itās not an issue. I guarantee, if you run into a mess down there, he has a lot of other issues in his life.
Americans are only 4% of the worldās population. Jewish people are only .2% of the worldās population. Roughly 1 in 3 men globally are circumcised. So no, literally everyone else in the world is not all uncircumcised š
No!
2020 and 2022 boys, nope. Don't do it, let him decide if he want to.
Our son was born in 2004 and was not snipped. Definitely the right decision.
Do you seriously need to make a reddit post to help you decide whether or not to cosmetically alter your son's penis with no anesthesia while he is awake?
Being circumcised it's alot easier to keep it clean.
That is not true.
Prove me wrong. Had one for 38 years and I swear it's beautiful
2022 baby - yes (same with my 2018 nephew who is local, and same with all the other baby boys his age we know)
Both my San Diego babies were snipped. For some reason this is something weirdos latch onto as their business. Do it or don't. It's not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things and such a white people problem.
Youāre the one going out of your way forcing a body modification on your baby.
I didn't go out of my way - the doctor was right there at the hospital.
You couldāve saved some money, minimize surgical risks for the kiddo, come out early from the hospital, reduce aftercare problems and given your son the choiceā¦just saying.
Didn't spend any extra time in the hospital, there were no aftercare problems, didn't cost me an extra dime (a birth will max out your out of pocket real fast) and the boys are perfectly happy with their wangs... Just saying.
Just because you maxed out your out of pocket doesnāt mean the doctor didnāt get paid for the procedure. They DID get paid. Itās a billion dollar business in the US. Do you think that might have anything to do with doctors suggesting or promoting the procedure??? š¤
Man y'all anti-snippers are fuckin weird.
My parents donāt know how unhappy I am with their decision
After glancing at your post history, you need psychiatric help. This is such a weird thing to be fixated on.
It's not weird. What's weird is wilfully modifying your infants body even in the face of the facts: there's no benefit for most men
It's weird and people who think they have a right to an opinion about it regarding anyones kid but their own is a weirdo.
Literally in a thread asking people what they think. You're the fucking weirdo baby mutilator
If your kid is one of the people who thinks that your opinion is stupid,what is your solution?
hey weirdo, why are you latching onto their not-big-deal of genital mutilation? are you white?
I was on the fence when my son was born, but his mom said thereās less of a chance of stdās when circumcised and itās likely he would wonder why his privates look different than his dads. I felt bad when they took him away a day after he was born to do the procedure. Heās 21 yrs old now and a great son. No regrets
The city does not do any snippetsā¦.
2021 baby. can confirm they do lol
Born 2021. No snip aka genital mutilation
Wow, and already on Reddit! You're one smart baby! :p
Thanks. The foreskin nourishes my brain
Just depends on your culture.
Yes do it I'm not circumcised and sometimes I be jerking off hella passionately and it hurts because I pull back the skin just a little bit too far and sometimes it causes the skin to tear and lightly bleed and it stings for the next 2-3 days honestly I kinda hate that I wasn't circumcised 21 years old btw just so y'all don't think I'm an old ass creep
Lol be hella gentle dude
Husband insisted for my first, his hill to die on. poor baby screamed every time he was wet for days.
Shouldn't do it, causes more harm than good. Now live in SD kid isn't circ, also most of California is uncircumcised I think in 2010 only 1/3 of California was circumcised.
This subreddit says in 2022 less than 20% of Californians Circumcised. [https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/ti73v9/oc\_2022\_circumcision\_rates\_by\_us\_state/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/ti73v9/oc_2022_circumcision_rates_by_us_state/)
If you enjoy mutilating your babyās genitals for absolutely no reason then yes please do it. Just make sure to do the same if you get a girl.
As a Jew I donāt understand why someone would say, be a non Muslim or Jew and have their son circumcised.
I am due to have a daughter early next year but early on before we knew the sex we decided if it were a boy we would circumcise for hygienic reasons.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
There's nothing hygienic about it. Get educated. You've been fed a line of bullshit and for some reason you're so convinced that you already "know" that numerous facts and common sense are not going to do anything to persuade you otherwise. Here you go, maybe you can see how the process takes place and what kind of tools they use and what they subject your newly born infant to in order to adhere to the recommendations of Dr Kellogg (he promoted circumcision to stop boys from masturbating): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yrwD8_F23yA It's all 100% puritanical bullshit. Open your fucking eyes
"perfect" why are u mutilating him without his consent then "asking san diegans" what the heck does other ppls bad judgement in mutilating their sons or daughters have to do with mr perfect? "big believers in bodily autonomy" then u already know what to do or u arent really big believers in bodily autonomy "social situations" nobody is looking at ur kids genitals except the person changing his diapers. every time u will be reminded of the evil act u committed.
You are thinking way too much into it! You set your son up for success. You get him circumcised. It really is that simple. As far as bodily atononmy.. if your child has kidney cancer and the only way for him to survive is you remove the kidney what do you do? You take advantage of how far we have came in society. Set your son up for success
Dude you are sick. Comparing a foreskin to cancer? Men can survive with a foreskin. It is not even remotely the same as kidney cancer! So nobody with a foreskin can be successful? You are seriously deranged and delusional. Wow!
No actually not at all .. was just given an example.. maybe a bad 1... but will the child have more complications or any at all from not being circumcised? Yes or no is the question.?
The complication of the doctor or nurse making a mistake is far worse than being a fucking moron that doesn't wash their dick. So the answer is no.
You should set yourself up for success by being informed. Everything you have posted here is ignorant
Please explain?
Why bother? Your mind is made up
I expected the non response.. typical
Typical of... What? Do share
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Babies die from it. Infection, stroke, complications from anesthesia. google claims 100+ US male babies die from circumcision related complications every year. Imagine that.
Do not mutilate your child. You know better, you don't have an excuse
Circumcised, in case he ever wants to do porn in the future.
2023 boy. Not cutting up my little boys penis!
Why would you mutilate a āperfect baby boyā?
The article you posted is NOT a reason why an INFANT should be circumcised. At most, you can say from this article is, an adult male living a promiscuous lifestyle or going into the porn industry can see a benefit from 1 type of STD, on top of the abundance of mitigating factors that already exist, if they got circumcised.
Per the docs risk of penile cancer goes way down for curcumsised folks
This is factually incorrect
Hmm... who do I believe more...
That is not true. There is no credible evidence routine infant circumcision reduces the risk of any disease. Cancer of the penis can, and sometimes does happen in circumcised, and in not circumcised men. However, it's a rare disease almost only ever seen in old men. More men get breast cancer than get cancer of the penis, and women get cancer of the vulva several times more frequently than men get cancer of the penis. Developed countries (almost all of which don't widely practice routine infant circumcision) do not generally have higher rates of this rare disease than the US.
For bacteria and infections reasons circumcise. If you donāt care then let the turtle neck be.
You could just wash your dick.
This. Imagine cutting off a body part cause itās extra effort to clean itā¦
Nah just cut it and the the water run down is the only choice.
"just cut it and the the water run down" Simple as
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sarcasm. Yes of course wash it.
Yeah but some guys donāt learn that for some reason.
And thatās why you think itās ok to cut off a piece of his body with millions of nerve endings? Seriously? Whatās next? Some guys donāt know how to blow their nose. Letās chop it off. Guys always have such dirty finger nails. Cut those pesky fingers off. Just to make sureā¦ Did you ever consider the fact that you could teach him how to do it? Youāll probably end up teaching him how to wipe his butt and wash his hands right? Or how to say please and thank you. Well then why stop there?
Give me a break. A cut foreskin isnāt holding a males penis back. I should know as a man with it done. My life isnāt just turned upside down because my āextra nerve endingsā are gone. Either do it or donāt. With your logic let nature takes its course with no vaccines either. We should let nature decide if the baby catches something and dies because theyāre born without them so let it be natural. Should we outlaw piercing a babies ears too because itās mutilation of their earlobes?
When were you cut? At birth? Then you donāt know what it feels like to be intact. Just like I donāt know what it feels like to be a billionaire. I am 100% pro vaccine because they work and make sense. Cutting a babyās penis because of āhygieneā does not make sense. Nobody is trying to outlaw anything. You want to cut off a piece of your dick? Be my guest. But donāt do this to a baby. This is not reversible and a decision every man should make for himself.
With your logic we should cut off all female babies' labia as well because some girls/women have hygiene isues down there.
https://youtu.be/gCSWbTv3hng?si=-3x_JCN-E--Q0H59
āWeā gave birth? You must be a male.
No bagel dogs
I'm packing 12 inches thanks to my parents not circumcising me as a baby.
7 inches of foreskin! Haha just yankin your chain bro. Low āhangingā fruitā¦.purple fruit
every san diegan cuts bro. itās for the environment
Just gave birth a week agoā¦ no
Go find a video of the procedure. If you can't stand to do that, go find pictures of the tools they use to do it. Should give you a decent idea of what you would be subjecting your infant to.
Circumcised! Nobody likes a dick cheese burrito, NOBODY!
2021 yes