I needed to go incognito for this post.

My first grandchild, a boy, will soon be born. My son and his wife plan to not approve a circumcision procedure, as they feel that it is barbaric. They would rather allow their son to make that personal choice. By the way, I completely agree.

My son was circumcised as a baby - I was following the script given us and didn't think much about it. He had no complications and understands the rationale supporting circumcision and doesn't blame me in anyway for the decision - but he does feel violated and mutilated in that what he feels should have been a personal decision about his body was made without his consent.

There was a lot of discussion and comparisons of the topic ranging from forced female circumcision, to foot binding, to infant ear piercings.

To the postmo men here - now that you are somewhat free of the religious script for circumcision - what say ye - to circumcise or not to circumcise?

Neonatologist here. No medical reason for circ in newborns unless urethral placement abnormalities such as hypospadias. This abnormality most often has foreskin abnormality that is sort of an auto-circ so even then not needed. The vast majority of infants in the world are not circed. This does not preclude gentle foreskin retraction with each diaper change to allow easy cleansing. This daily retraction is all that is necessary....

Gatorman
Conquerors of the Peach Bowl

You are a neonatologist ? I thought you just liked large reptiles or something. I'm flabbergasted.

Not

Leave his peepee alone!

Not. Listen to Gatorman.

I say yes. And I've heard both sides of the issue.

Gay male dude here. A lot of experience with penises.

Not cir'ed. No kids so I can't say more on that point.

But if you are not cir'ed you can retract the skin (in most cases) and it will look like it is cir'ed if that is the preferred look. In many cases the retracted foreskin will catch behind the corona and and stay there especially when erect.

Why lock yourself into one option when you can have two?

I've never been able to figure it out.

Kind of like driving a convertible?

No, don’t. I am, but we didn’t have it done to our son.

The rationale is simple, in an Occam’s razor sort of way: no unnecessary procedures, period.

Ya, the procedure is easy, but bad stuff still happens:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/winnipeg-doctor-suspended-botched-circumcisions-1.4953561

Human

(On the broader point of cosmetic surgery: how much real good could have been done for people with real needs if all the boob & tuck & butt & etc surgeons were using their skill set for, well, actually needed surgeries? Colossal waste of talent and energy, in the service, mostly, of the basest most ridiculous levels of vanity. Pity.)

We had our son curcumcised when he was born 32 years ago. I had no preference one way or the other, but my husband did. He hadn’t been circumcised as a newborn, and then had some medical situation that created a need to have the procedure done as a toddler, so he felt strongly about it. None of our 4 grandsons have been circumcised, and I don’t know that I would agree to it now as I did then.

FWIW-

I've heard there is some research saying that gay men have less incidence of STDs if they've been circ'd.

I myself knew a gay man who had it done because that....


like I say, FWIW!

Have you recently embraced Islam? Judaism? Don't do it. Remember this one thing: Doctors used to say that infants couldn't feel pain(they even performed open heart surgery on infants without anesthetic), but we know that's bull-Shiz. Circumcision is still done without anesthesia, and the pain is similar to having your eyelid scraped off. It's been a thing since WWII era Army doctors made men get cut before serving in the Pacific. Except for incapacitating a soldier for two weeks, circumcision did nothing.

No, we have not embraced Islam or Judaism. While both the BoM and the D&C state that circumcision is no longer necessary as the Law of Moses was fulfilled in Christ, there still has been a Mormon cultural embrace of circumcision as they considered themselves gathered Israelites. I believe that Mormons conflated their religious identity regarding circumcision with the general trend of circumcision as a medical practice in America.

I have two friends with penises who strongly feel that circumcision is wrong and wish that they hadn't been circumcised. It's a very passionate subject for them.

I say best to let an individual decide when they get older if they want/need it.

Nevermo here but I've done a lifelong study.
Don't do it. Most men I have known have had it done and across the board the circumcised men have had extreme anger/self identity issues.
Thank Gawd I'm finally getting plenty of uncut lust now.

Adds about half an inch to the peen.

To the tip.....I mean top!

I had my son circumcised, as I had been. But he's not pleased with it. I feel bad about it.

Just wondering: If circumcision is actually NOT medically necessary, how is it billed? Cosmetic surgery? It was part of the package deal when my son was born. Nobody gave it a second thought. That was 40+ years ago.

These days, do they charge extra for it? I have no clue.

I paid cash for it. It was not covered by insurance.

Why would anyone alter or cut off anything that someone was naturally -like every other male on the planet- born with?

When it all started back when what sort of a nut job thought this was a good idea?

Alan XL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When it all started back when what sort of a nut
> job thought this was a good idea?

It was devised as a tribal identification mutilation.
And not just by the early Hebrews, either.

Yeah, I'm in the "don't do it" crowd.
It was done to me.
I didn't do it to my son. The cut-off-buck stopped here.

>what sort of a nut
> job thought this was a good idea?

Dr. Tissot... in 1760

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel-Auguste_Tissot

It was thought to discourage masturbation.

As a male who was circumcised as an infant because my parents bought into the whole "health reasons" BS before it was debunked... I say please, PLEASE don't do it.

I feel like I was violated. And in my particular case I believe it caused some complications that have haunted me my entire life. It's simply not worth it.

Definitely do not do it unless medically necessary. I can't even believe it is still an option. Female genital mutilation for religious or cultural reasons is rightfully being eliminated, it is time for male genital mutilation to follow the same path. I was circumcised as an infant, and out of ignorance I had my two boys circumcised as well. I wish to hell I had not done that.

The cynic in me tells me it became a medical necessity in the US when doctors realized how profitable it could be. As a general practice it is just as barbaric as female genital mutilation.

I say no. As an adult, I've had to have surgery to correct stenosis caused by circumcision. It wasn't pleasant.

No. I worked in the newborn nursery for many, many years. Circumcision was the norm. It is barbaric.

When I was dating my now husband we discussed this at length and with great passion - if we had kids would the boys be circumcised. This was almost a deal breaker keeping us from marrying.

We compromised- we wouldn’t have them circumcised as infants, but would pay for the procedure when they became of age if they wanted to have it done.

I have 2 young boys and I left the decision up to my hubs, as he should have a better basis for an opinion on the subject than I. He decided that no we would not do that to our babies because a) barbaric and unnecessary and b) we shouldn't decide that for them. I was slightly reluctant, but ONLY because of cultural pressure and I don't necessarily mean Mormon culture (hubs is a nevermo).
My snake of a TBM sister and her husband actually made fun of us and our babies when they found out that we didn't do it. But not only that, all of my supposed nevermo friends have all circ'd their boys and talk to everyone with the assumption that they've done it to their boys. I don't even feel like I could admit to these friends that we didn't do it. I feel vulnerable to ridicule. I'm surprised to hear so many of you in support of not doing it. But that makes me happy and reassured in our decision.

I’ve put countless terrified young boys and elderly men under general anesthesia for medically necessary circumcisions.

Every one of them would have preferred it to be done at birth, under local anesthesia, in a matter of minutes, with no lingering memory of the event.

Unless medically necessary, I saw no reason to circ my son when he was born. My husband agreed. We got a surprising amount of pushback from our parents, but held firm and did not circumcise our son.

We both feel that it's a decision that he should make for himself. I like Pugsly's suggestion to help pay for it, should my son decide later he wants it done. I will probably adopt that idea as well.

In the mountains of western Arabia, were tribes that performed a "flaying circumcision" in which the skin was removed from the navel down to the inside of the legs. Then the wounds were "kippered" over the smoke of a fire for days afterwards. Not all candidates survived.

This practice was outlawed sometime during the reign of King Ibn Saud (early/mid 20th century), but the practice was continued in secret for years/decades(?) afterwards.