Have you changed your views on circumcision by becoming better informed?

I have been encouraging parents to investigate the reality of circumcision in the hope of saving at least some babies from mutilation. Have any of you changed your mind about having the operation performed because of your becoming better informed? What specifically has caused you to change your mind?


Of the first 4 answers, only one mentioned he did the research. Read the question before answering please!

Update 2:

Pro or con, it would help if you cite specific examples of your research(I would assume that would include a video of the operation or actually seeing it perforemed).

Update 3:

Pro or con, it would help if you cite specific examples of your research(I would assume that would include a video of the operation or actually seeing it performed).

Update 4:

ILOVEMYH: "we didn't have to do research"...are you in the habit of making uninformed decisions?

Update 5:

Mommy2be: at least have the guts to watch a video of it, so you know what you will be doing to your son.

Update 6:

31weeks with #1Noah: which video did you watch?

Update 7:


Update 8:

This is one; there are others:

video with sound of an infant circumcisionvideo.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6584757516627632617 - Similar pages

Update 9:

When my son was born, his mother wanted him circumcised because his foreskin didn't retract. LADIES, THIS IS NORMAL. I did not allow him to be cut, and after a short time it retracted and he is now 21 and NORMAL and thanks me for saving him from the knife.

Update 10:

Mark: for one thing, traditional circumcision used to be only the very tip of the foreskin until some cornflake name Jophn Harvey Kellogg recommended a more radical mutilation as a cure for masturbation, and he advocated "no anesthetic" because pain had a salutary effect on the mind. That's the company you keep.

Update 11:

FEDUP you have made my day, knowing I have helped prevenet another mutilation. Spread the word. You are a caring parent. 10 points

18 Answers

  • Shayna
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Thom, most people don't have the guts to watch a video, with sound. The "I don't need to watch a video, I'm already well-informed" excuse is a bit of hogwash. I'm appalled at the number of mothers who want to have this done because of outdated, old-fashioned ideas (not to mention laziness in not wishing to teach their sons how to properly clean themselves). The thought of listening to my son scream and not being by his side to comfort and protect him disturbs me.

    I'm just waiting for one of those 38% of men who feel upset at having been mutilated at birth to sue. I think it would be a major headache for the courts, not to mention a very long process.

    By the way, the same reasons for removing the foreskin in the male also apply to removing the clitoral hood in the female. Strangely enough, you would be arrested, charged with assault, and jailed at having your daughter's clitoral hood removed at birth. The external female genitalia is actually dirtier than the male, considering it's 'enclosed' most of the time. It is not easier to clean than the penis is. Thom, I'm sure you understand that I have a bit of a unique perspective on that (though I shudder at the thought of it).

    Keep up the good fight, dear sir. Someday this practice will be nearly non-existent. I have my doubts it will end completely though.

    And to the lady who didn't have her son circumsized at birth, he now has the choice to go ahead and do it himself. That's the point Thom is trying to get through to people. It isn't your penis, therefore it isn't your decision. Most likely the only reason he wishes it was done is because he feels he's in the minority (which is false), and many American women won't even go near an uncircumsized penis because they think it's 'dirty and disease-ridden'. It's a good thing women elsewhere in the world know that is BS.

    Edit: Oh my god. Not painful? You're kidding, right? Babies feel pain very acutely, my dear. What the hell do you think? They're born without the capacity to feel pain? The foreskin is fused to the glans much like your fingernail is fused to your nailbed. Try ripping it off, and it is very painful.

    Edit #2: As for the only opinion mattering, wrong again. It is not your body, not your penis, not your decision. It is against the law here in Canada for parents to consent to non-therapeutic procedures on their children. The law isn't enforced regarding circumcision, but once one man stands up and does something about it, it will be. I can't wait for that day.

    Mark - circumcision did not catch on in America because of religious reasons. Robert Kellogg (yes, the guy who invented corn flakes) promoted circumcision as a way to end masturbation. How did he figure it would do that? By decreasing sensitivity. Well, it backfired. Statistically circumsized men masturbate more often than non-circumsized. Why? Because they do, indeed, have less sensitivity, and need harder stimulation to achieve orgasm.

    - it is not cleaner

    - it does not prevent diseases

    - it is not just a 'piece of skin'

    - it protects the penis

    - it is fused to the glans of the penis in infants, and must be ripped off in order to be removed

    - it provides lubrication

    - it aids in correct movement during intercourse

    - the practice is declining, even in America

    - America is the ONLY developed country that still practices this for non-religious reasons

    - American women don't have a clue want a true penis feels like

    - American men are in the minority, because over 80% of the world's men are NOT circumsized

    - it takes 56 circumcisions to prevent ONE case of HIV in Africa

    - it is a mutilation, performed upon a child without their consent

    - according to Canadian laws, it may very well be illegal (parents are not permitted to consent to non-therapeutic procedures being performed on their children)

    - there is some evidence that circumcision may be one of the causes of high impotence rates in America (did you know that America has one of the highest in the world? What does that say about American men?)

    - there is medical evidence that proves that the amount of endorphins released into the bloodstream during the very painful procedure is enough to have a serious effect on a baby's physiology

    - there is some evidence that points to the trust-bond being disrupted between mother and son when he's crying out in pain for her comforting touch, but she doesn't respond

    - penile cancer is rare, and its incidence is no higher in intact males who practice proper hygiene

    - the glans penis continues to keratinize during aging, and at some point, there will be little to no sensation left (many men find this begins to happen in their late 20s to early 30s)

    - nearly 38% of American males who are circumsized are unhappy (that's over 1/3 of them!), and those who are content are probably so because of ignorance

    - circumcision as performed today is not the same circumcision that was commanded in the Bible, nor is it commanded for Christians. In fact, in the New Testament it specifically states that it offers no benefit for the Gentile

    Also, on the HIV topic. A fact for you. The United States has the highest rate of HIV infection in the developed, first-nations world. Yet, nearly 60% of the males are circumsized. Now, if it reduces the risk of HIV infection, why, pray tell, is the infection rate so high there? Could it be because of the false claims of protection against HIV that men and women are more willing to sleep around without using protection? Maybe, just maybe.

    Edit: Was it John Kellogg? Why the heck do I think it's Robert Kellogg?

    Edit to above: Yep. It is John Kellogg. I'm still not sure why I think his name is Robert.

  • Slava
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    "Healthier alternative?" The main reason that the scourge of circumcision became so widespread in the USA in the first place was a certain element in the medical profession---mainly the members of the religions that try to impose the mutilation of circumcision on all males--are always looking for a new reason to keep making money and spreading genital mutilation on all male infants. The CDC was considering recommending circumcision to "prevent HIV"---which it obviously doesn't do---as at the height of the HIV epidemic about 85% of males in the USA were circumcised, and all of the countries in Europe, Scandinavia, South America and most of Asia had and still have much lower HIV rates----they don't mutilate male children in those areas. Circumcision doesn't prevent any diseases or infections------the only things that it prevents are complete, natural and normal sexual feeling and function. Circumcision has no standards. The damage, both neural and vascular--to the penis vary wildly, as evidenced by the scars from the wounds inflicted, ranging in location from just below the glans to 1/2 or even 2/3 of the way down the penile shaft. The depth also varies. Healthier? I think not. Circumcision can kill. Circumcision can cause permanent sexual dysfunction. Circumcision always diminishes sexual sensitivity, usually about 50-75%, and can be much more, depending on the damage to the individual. Most of the males in the world are not circumcised. They're not dropping dead by the thousands from being unmutilated by circumcision. Circumcision is a fraud and a hoax. A foreskin is not a birth defect; it is a birthright. ERIC

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Definitely. I researched it a few years ago from a netural point of view, and knowing some family members circumcised and birth and some circumcised later on (although most aren't circumcised) and I quickly realised it was a very bad thing to do to an infant. It only took a few minutes to realise that the benefits are minor and never strongly proven, the tradition is rooted in religion and anti-masturbation, there is a strong potential for things to go wrong and the loss of sexual sensation is definite. Besides why mess with the way it's meant to be?

    When I heard more news about HIV infection and the like again I thought, like many people, that this could be a positive thing. Unlike most people I took a good look at the studies and realised that with such dodgy studies and such a minor reduction it would make absolutely no sense to take the risk anyway, condoms and being careful are what is needed.

    Sadly a lot of people don't do this much research and just listen to anecdotal evidence shared in circumcising cultures about "foreskin infections" and "ugly foreskins" and the like.

  • 1 decade ago

    Yes, I did. I was full expecting to have it done to any sons...until I came across someone like you when I was pregnant with my first. To tell you the truth, the person irritated the he)) out of me...but I am glad the person did what they did do, or they would not have saved my son from that agony.

    The clincher for me was finding out that they SELL the foreskin for PROFIT. "They" meaning the Dr. and the hospital that the baby was born in. I thought selling of body parts was illegal?

    What changed my husbands mind was finding out the BS arguments like from Kellogg in the 1930's and before which supported it. But the thing that totally makes my husband feel disgusted about it is when people say that it can "prevent" STDs! He can't understand their ideology and the studies are obviously biased as to continue the selling of body parts through making the parents afraid.

    As a side note, my father has had that dreaded penile cancer, and it was a God send that he still had his foreskin because it was easier for him to tell that something was wrong verses having the cancer and not having any symptoms until it was too late...which can and does happen if you don't have the foreskin.

    EDIT: MarkG...the foreskin is NOT just "Skin"..it is an organ which has a purpose such as the lips and eyelids. Please do research before answering.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Violet
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    My opinion on circumcision hasn't changed, I never agreed with it. I did have my first done only because my husband insisted. I allowed it even though I really didn't want to. I wept as they wheeled him away. After our first was born and cut I eventually did research on the subject and watched a video of the procedure- I could not bring myself to watch most of it. From then on I would never have another of my children cut. My husband and I had another son- I did not have him cut. My husband even tried to fight with me about it. I told him if he didn't like it then he could leave. It is nothing but mutilation for "cosmetic" purposes. As long as you teach your son to take a FEW extra SECONDS to retract his foreskin to clean it there are usually no problems. There are more problems with circumcision than there are with a clean uncut penis.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I've seen what they do to sons, but here in america I am circumcised so I want my son to be as well. It is a terrible horrific site but it is by no means mutilation. Your just cutting the skin off no big deal. It is all cosmetic and nothing else. I want all my sons if I have anymore to be circumcised just b/c I am and most of the people he will be around are circumcised as well. I really don't know why it's a big deal if a baby gets circumcised or a baby doesn't, but it really seems to bother you. Is there a reason why this subject bothers you so much, to where you go as far as calling it mutilation??

    Shayna?? Why is it such a big deal to have a baby circumcised. It is the parents decision. So if your baby is acting up and you spank them that's your decision I mean come on, you guys are making this out to be a huge deal when it's not. Some people do it for religious purposes and that caught on in america and now it's done for cosmetic reasons. What if your son was in sports and had to take a shower and every guy was circumcised but him and he got made fun of. No guy should be made fun of b/c of his penis and that would definitely trigger criticism. Most babies in america are circumcised now if your in europe or another country so be it, most men aren't circumcised there but here in america they are.. So that's why I did it to my son and that's why I am circumcised. I don't hate my parents b/c of it and I doubt my son will hate me for doing it. Also you can't hate on people for doing it, they have their reasons. You and Thom can have your reasons for not doing it and others can have their reasons for doing it, it should never be a law to not have a baby's penis circumcised. I mean circumcision is in the Bible for crying out loud. Damn far out liberals, so liberal that you take away peoples rights when being a liberal is all about freedom.. What is the world coming to, next you'll want to take away our guns that most of us use for hunting for food during the winter!!

    Shayna?? and Thom One thing for Thom.. I enjoy the company I keep and they are not demon mutilators.. the rest is for Shayna: Disease is not a factor anymore, nobody believes that crap anymore so stop crying about it. The fact of the matter is your trying to stop parents from doing things to their kids when in fact it is their kids and not yours. Also IMPOTENCE RELATED TO CIRCUMCISION is just ridiculous. What happens on the inside has nothing to do with whether or not you have foreskin. Come on your just reaching with that one. Also about having less sensitivity in the area should be beneficial to you ladies, to me it means men will only last longer if they need harder stimulation. Also I like the way and most of the women I know like the way a circumcised penis looks. Just b/c you hate americans doesn't give you right to protest and tell them how they should treat their kids. What gives you the right to tell someone they are mutilating their kid, when they're doing the best they can and doing what they feel is right or normal for their kid. Also is it really that big a deal.. One last thing.. Suing someone for being circumcised.. that's all I hear these days.. when you say you can't wait until someone sues shows your true colors.. why do people think money can make everything go away!!!

    Source(s): I have a son and he is circumcised.
  • 1 decade ago

    I chose not to have my son circumsized. He is now 8 years old and doing fine. I taught him how to keep it clean and everytime he gets in the bath I remind him to clean it first thing so he doesnt forget. Sometimes I think it would be easier to have had it done, but he is doing fine with it.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I've changed my mind, based on what I've heard over the years. I don't have kids, but I was born/raised Jewish and was circumsised. Originally I thought it was healthy, civilized, etc. But I've come to see it as an outmoded practice, sort of barbaric. If I had a boy I wouldn't do that to him.

    I'm not angry about what was done to me, its never really caused me any problems. But I feel there is a sort of magnificence in the human body, its complexity and how well everything works (usually). Whether this was designed by God or arrived through evolution is not relevant, the idea is that children are born with everything they need and modifications are unnecessary.

  • 1 decade ago

    No I haven't.I wouldn't let anyone effect my decisions regarding my child anyways.Especially someone I do not know..Me & my husband made a desicion together & we decided that it is best for our child.Seeing as our opinion is the ONLY opinion that matters or that will EVER matter regarding our child,it doesnt really matter what anyone else thinks about it..I am not trying to be rude but you might want to stay out of other peoples business when it comes to their children..Some people don't take well to that..Just my 2 cents.

    EDIT-Oh boohoo.You really hurt my feelings(sarcasm).I know exactly how they do it & I think you need a new hobby..You can say whatever you want,but there is nothing you can do about any of it.This is a desicion EVERY PARENT has a right to make.Doesnt really matter what you think.You can't change it.You do it your way & I'll do it mine.

    Source(s): 34 weeks & 2 days with baby # 1!!It's a boy!!
  • 1 decade ago

    I did not have my son circumsized when he was an infant because I was alone, and very frightened, and given the confusing circumstances, was not sure what to do. Now he is 21 and has told me personally that he wishes that he had been circumsized.

  • 1 decade ago

    Actually, no.... research did not make me change my mind. I can tell what you WANT people to say (by use of the word 'mutilation', it is pretty obvious what YOU feel about it).... but again, I carefully researched the pros and cons of circumcision prior to the birth of my son, and decided that the pros of circumcision far outweighed the cons. So, my son was circumcised the day after he was born.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.