If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
In medical circles, neonatal male circumcision was long assumed to be psychologically and emotionally benign. It was believed that newborn infants had "poorly developed" neurologic systems; that newborns could not feel pain; or, if they did feel the pain, they would not remember it. According to that orthodoxy, the experience of neonatal circumcision could never have any lasting effect on a child and could not traumatize a child. The belief that infants cannot feel pain is now outmoded and discredited. Enough evidence now exists to say with confidence that male circumcision causes psychological changes. The trauma of the experience is injurious. It can have long-term deleterious effects later in life.
Fathers are frequently unable to vocalize their feelings. They will say that "I want my son to look like me," even though the child may be different in eye color, hair color, and other aspects. In fact, what the father really may be feeling is, "I don't want a son with an intact penis to remind me of what I have lost."
Parents need to be aware that circumcision is dangerous. It involves traumatic loss of a body part. There is a definite potential for long-lasting psychologic injury. Break the cycle and leave your own sons intact as nature intended.
In which case, that is bullying. They only make intact boys the butt of their jokes because they were never given the opportunity to experience the advantages and benfits of a foreskin.
More and more Americans are turning their backs on circumcision. If wanting your son mutilated for no reason other than to be the 'norm' amongst other amputees, and you were my mother, I would hate you forever for the feeble excuse you used to mutilate me once I had become aware of the atrocity you allowed to be performed on me. You are supposed to PROTECT me from harm.
Do you agree with female circumcision then? Where the clitoris is cut out of a woman in Muslim and African countries? This is 'cultural' and the 'norm'. Can you imagine being without YOUR clitoris?
http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/fgm1.htm
I bet this girl is ecstatic that she looks like all the other girls too ... !
I thought you said you liked cut ...
As you say, if he was circumcised at 6 and before being sexually active, how would he know anything other than his circumcised status?
Have a look at these pics which will give you an idea of how much sensitive and erogenous penile skin is actually cut away by circumcision :-
http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/3zones-c.htm
Just as long as you realise your logic is fucked up.
No - you misunderstand me completely. I like cut too. I have made that PERFECTLY clear.
What I am against is the routine, non-essential 'trimming' of baby boys' penises when there is absolutely NO MEDICAL justification and yet has permanent and profound implications on a male's sexual enjoyment for the rest of his life. Who are YOU to inflict that on your son just because you personally don't like foreskins? Children die every year from botched circumcisions - is that worth losing your son it in your own eyes? I don't like clitorises that much (many look like a badly-packed kebab) but I am appalled that anyone would want to cut out the clitoris of any female.
If your opinion has not changed and yet you are presented with the possibility of learning the facts (unlike those US mothers who have, as yet, no idea of the implications of their actions), you are one mother who should be found guilty of child abuse ... your personal preference doen't come into it - save your son's foreskin FOR your son and not for you. It's hardly like you are going to have much to do with it anyway except keep it clean when he is a baby.
Honestly, one day he will thank you ....
he started young.
i think he probably says it because i've heard it makes it more sensitive.
No - circumcision causes the keratinisation (thickening) of the skin of the head of the penis (the glans) and so it becomes LESS sensitive over time .. the foreskin is there to protect the glans so that it remains moist, soft and sensitive.
The only non-medical benefit to circumcision is that the lack of sensitivity can assist in preventing premature ejaculation and, therefore, prolonging intercourse but this is a very drastic remedy to what is a simple problem which alternative treatment can help.
Why exactly is it so popular in the USA?
Even Joey from friends is circumsised
Do most guys in the USA have it done to them as kids or choose to do it as adults?
Usually it's only Jews and Muslims that practise it as the norm for their boys..
Oh god no! JOEY from FRIENDS is circumsised?? Oh my god!! Its kind of creepy that you know.
It was origonally down to a late Victorian belief that circumcision aided the prevention of masturbation amongst boys ... :yeees:
Since then it has essentially become a cash cow to the US medical profession aided by their encouragment of US males that they should always look like their daddies in the shower - even if their hair and eye colour and body shape is different .... the numbers are droppoing in the States but rates are still up around the 80% mark or so.
Naah it was on TV last night - joey goes for an audition and they want a uncut guy but he's already cut so monica makes him a foreskin with silly putty
So why is it so popular in the USA?
Also I've seen reports that say circumsised men are less likely to catch AID's
But it could just be that places where men are more likely to be cut are also Muslim areas where they're probabaly less likely to screw around and catch HIV inthe first place.
See above - it's all about money ...
Only slightly less likely. Foreskins can be inclined to tear slightly which is an avenue for the HIV virus to enter the body ... but circumcision has been cold comfort to all those circumcised American men that are presently living and dying of AIDS every day ... circumcision is NO protection against AIDS.
Quite a plausable explanation ...
And that is a perfectly legitimate reason to have it done ... :thumb: .. at least you had the option to choose. And I am sure it looks great! :flirt:
No not really, the clenliness of someones penis is down to how clean they are, having a foresking or not makes little difference. Nothing should "collect" under it because it should be cleaned every day, also urine does not get under it because you pull it back when you go to the toilet. If someone is dirty enough not to do these things then having a foreskin will make it worse, but they are still a dirty person.
It's like saying a women shold have the excess skin of her vagina removed to make it cleaner.
Its not rocket science, and unless you think a foreskin is a piece of dirt rather than a piece of penis, then i dont see how its presence is unclean.