Here's a question worth pondering. Are uncircumcised fathers more likely to circumcise their sons than circumcised fathers are to leave their sons uncircumcised?
My gut says that, as the medical evidence grows on the health value of circumcision, more and more uncircumcised dads are saying, hey, I want what's best for my son -- and that means a healthy, clean-cut penis from the start of life.
Is there any empirical evidence for this supposition?
I have blogged earlier that there is nothing more admirable -- and no one more deserving the title of FATHER -- than an uncircumcised dad who gives his newborn the gift of circumcision. There is a special place in Heaven for these men who recognize that just because they have a foreskin is no reason for their sons to be so afflicted, especially when the chances are much greater in the 21st century that a foreskin will increase a male's chance of HIV, STD, HPV, and other diseases.
Are there circumcised men who leave their sons with a foreskin prone to disease? Of course, there must be some who are taken in by the anti-circ propaganda and a few who have developed a psychological problem over being clean-cut. But, once again, my gut says that most circumcised dads want their sons to enjoy the healthy penises that they have -- to say nothing of the aesthetic and social reasons to circumcise.
In my view, circumcising your son to "look like" you is no more valid than leaving your son uncircumcised to "look like" you. The best reason for all fathers, regardless of their own circumcision status, to circumcise their sons is that it is in the child's best health interests. That's all you need to do the right thing!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My husband is uncircumcised but our son was circumcised at birth. Our son is 3 now, and we are very pleased with our decision and I think our littly guy is too! We followed all the instructions for the week or so the circumcision took to heal, and we didn't have any problems at all. It looks great and it's nice and easy to clean.
ReplyDeleteNow I just need to work on DH to get him to get the cut too. I don't want to make a big deal about it, but I would prefer it CUT!! ;-)
how about you go fuck yourself you are a pedophile and sexual predator i bet you are rotting in jail right now for molestation your medical research is bullshit.....you are a circumsexual pedophile like ben stinkie.....
DeleteThanks for posting, Sue. I think your experience is exactly what is happening all over, although the nice twist that I should have mentioned is the role of the smart mother! You obviously knew the advantages of circumcision for your newborn son AND your uncircumcised husband didn't object. As for getting your husband cut, just share this blog with him. Given the growing medical evidence that a circumcised male is healthier for his female partner, I'm betting he will do what is in YOUR best interest by getting circumcised. Good luck, Sue!
ReplyDeleteMy Dad is cut but my brother and I are not. I dated a US woman in the 1980s. We nearly got married, me getting cut was the deal breaker. But we had already decided that she would circumcise any sons we had as it was a family tradition for her.
ReplyDeleteAll her male cousins, nephews, etc were clipped as she proudly showed me. She worked on any resistance I initially had and it became clear it was her decision.
I heard later she did get married to someone else and I would imagine that indeed, all her boys are done...
Ben
you are a pedophile ben winkie...dont make me post your pictures of what you like to do over circumstraints and with gomco clamps...go rot in hell
DeleteHey Ben, you're another example of the point I was making. Even though uncircumcised, you were willing to let this woman circumcise any sons you might have had. My own view is that many uncircumcised dads would do the same. Thanks for your post.
ReplyDeleteYes PD, you're probably right that every dad who identitifies himself with photos of circumcision clamps would be willing to cut his son.
ReplyDeletePS - your example of "many uncircumcised dads" says he likes "Being masturbated whilst circumcision is being discussed. Watching circumcisions with others."
ReplyDeleteYou, Jake, and Ben Winkie might like to get together!
"PS - your example of "many uncircumcised dads" says he likes "Being masturbated whilst circumcision is being discussed. Watching circumcisions with others."
ReplyDeleteYou, Jake, and Ben Winkie might like to get together!
ROFL haha! and they call intactivists insane! Look at his "blogs I follow" ... oh my!
Wow, this blog is beyond insane. You do realize mandatory circumcision would be illegal and wildly unethical. I think it's disgusting that parents think they have the right to do this to their kids and the idea that there are compelling health reasons is just hilarious. The very small health benefits are rendered null by the risks and obliterated by hygiene, which you'll need regardless of a foreskin. Noticed the blogger is in the midwest, where they apparently have a huge thing with circumcision. Kind of weird, since I've heard they're mostly Nordic, a part of the world vehemetly opposed to circumcision (almost no one is done there save for religion) and incidentally that brags the lowest HIV and STD rates in the world.
ReplyDeleteThe most recent Anonymous has obviously missed some of my earlier comments about "mandatory" circumcision, so let's correct the record. I believe we would all be better off if every male was clean-cut and circumcised. The foreskin breeds disease and increases the risk in both the male and his partners for HIV, STD, HPV, cancer, and all sorts of other diseases. The medical studies are clear about this.
ReplyDeleteI also think the U.S. government (and, frankly, all governments) should follow the African example and embrace a national goal of 100% circumcised. Good public policy would encourage all male children to be circumcised before attending school, just as we require with all kinds of vaccinations.
But just as we do with vaccinations, I would allow parents to conscientiously object to their son being circumcised for religious reasons and even the very rare medical reason (e.g., hemophilia). This preserves parental choice, something by the way that the anti-circumcision fanatics want to take away from parents when it comes to their newborns.
Anon, you are welcome to comment on this site. But, please, calling this blog "insane" when we are in accord with latest medical research is vituperative polemics when we should encourage rational conversation. Circumcision is the wave of the future because it is medically the right thing to do!
sexual torture of infants is dying you sick mother fucker so go cry you little child abusing chomo
DeleteAnd from this woman's point of view, circ is so much nicer looking. I had my son done at birth and don't regret it for a minute. I've shown this blog to my uncut DH and he's now considering getting circ'd too. I hope it will be soon.
ReplyDelete- A (soon to be) very happy wife
Sue, why do you think your opinion about what looks nicer can justify amputation of sexual tissue from non-consenting minors? Shouldn't it be *his* decision, especially since your reasons are cosmetic?
ReplyDeletePD - I'm the author of the posts pointing out that Ben Winkie gets off sexually watching circumcisions - but I agree with you that we should not call this blog insane, or make fun of people's sexuality. That also applies to you, Mr. PD: stop insulting people with foreskins, or those who wish they had a foreskin, or those who think it is unethical to amputate sexual tissue from minors.
ReplyDeleteHowever, this is a disturbing blog. Masturbating while watching movies of circumcision is a private sexual matter, but advocating circumcision in a public forum because you enjoy that sexual activity may cross the line of good judgement.
To the last Anon: I was very tempted to remove your postings about Ben Winkie's sexuality because it violates my rule that this blog be one open for all eyes. This is not a blog for sex of any kind. I do not post pictures, and I certainly do not want any pornographic content posted here at all.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry. Keep whatever sexual fetishes you may have off this blog. I'm sure there are plenty of other blogs out there where you can enjoy your fantasies against (and for) circumcision. But this is NOT one of them.
So, Anon, while you may be "disturbed" by those of us who argue in favor of circumcision, I have NEVER argued for circumcision on a sexual basis, although I can appreciate all the reasons for that. My posts have been focused on the positive health reasons to circumcise. That is not only "good judgment" but also wise public policy. Please keep your sexual fetishes off my blog!
Thanks, Sue, for your posts. I agree about the aesthetics of circumcision. We hear that all the time. But that can be a matter of personal judgment. What is not are the very sound HEALTH and MEDICAL reasons to circumcise. That alone is the best reason to circumcise your sons -- and the reason I hope your husband will do the right thing.
ReplyDeleteNo PD, you are deluded. A quick perusal of your comments, especially early on in your blog, shows that you have mostly argued for circumcision on the basis of ridicule and sexuality. Just look at your comments, dude! You might want to delete some of your own posts first to clean things up to your new standards.
ReplyDeleteBen Winkie is pretty open about his sexuality, and I think that's great. He's not hiding anything, and my pointing it out doesn't add sexual content: it's already there.
dh has had infections in the time we've been together. I would certainly feel better if he was circumcised for his health AND for my health and peace of mind. I don't want to have problems that could be easily prevented by this simple procedure. Thanks PD for this blog. So much trouble could be spared if every male was circumcised at birth. That's why we circumcised our son and we're very happy about that.
ReplyDeleteI'm circumcised, and I've had infections, several times, that required antibiotics. Sue, you might be infecting your husband. The vagina is teaming with fungus and bacteria. My bet is that circumcising your DH will not stop his problems.
ReplyDeleteThe owner of this blog is sadly mistaken about the medical evidence. For one thing, evidence collected from Third World nations has no bearing on whether boys reared in the First World should be routinely circumcised.
ReplyDeleteWhat routine circumcision discards has substantial erogenous value, for men for sure, and for some women as well.
If a man washes under the foreskin as part of his daily shower, rinses off his penis before beginning sex, and uses condoms when doing casual sex, circumcision is not worth the cost and trouble. Most of the problems blamed on the foreskin are really caused by misuse of the penis.
The owner of this blog is sadly mistaken about the medical evidence. For one thing, evidence collected from Third World nations has no bearing on whether boys reared in the First World should be routinely circumcised.
ReplyDeleteWhat an extraordinary thing to say, especially for someone claiming to hold the high ground in terms of the medical evidence!
Are Third World penes different from First World penes? Of course not: they're the same. And so the biological consequences of circumcision in the Third World are the same as those in the First World. So, obviously, evidence should be taken into account, regardless of its origin.
Having said that, it needs to be considered intelligently. For example, the lifetime risk of HIV in parts of Africa is 35%, whereas in the US it is about 0.6%. So it's important to recognise that the magnitude of the benefit will be greater in settings with a higher absolute risk.
What routine circumcision discards has substantial erogenous value, for men for sure, and for some women as well.
If that were so, studies would consistently reveal sexual harms associated with circumcision. Needless to say, they don't.
Just about as extraordinary as the claims that circumcision in Africa will make a significant dent on AIDS.
ReplyDeleteI am not aware of a single study proving that circumcised men in any one place actually live longer than their uncut brethren. The "sophisticated" mathematical models I have read about turn out to be just a pair of simple differential equations based on the now-famous 60% rate, along with some guesses about how long it takes people to die after infection, transmission efficiency per sex act, and so forth. As far as models go, it's pretty naive. If it were an economic model it would be laughed out of the boardroom. And it sure would be stupid to bank on it in the bedroom.
Jake's statement about "Third World" penises is just an opinion that the 60% rate achieved in these studies is completely decoupled and independent from other factors, both cultural and biological. But alas the real world is not described very often by linearly independent terms, and cross-coupling is inevitable. These studies were conducted in places were HIV infection is enormous and anomalous - as much as 35% of the population infected. Given this setting, it's unlikely that the apparent protection afforded by circumcision can be extrapolated to places like Britain, Australia, or the U.S. Something else is going on to attain these high levels of infection.
Circumcision might be worth a shot where AIDS is epidemic, where most people can't get antiretroviral drugs. It would be far more valuable to know why populations in South Africa have a female infection prevalence of 15%. It's hard to pin numbers like that on a foreskin.
"Non-therapeutic circumcision (NTC). The SMF continues its work towards ending NTC in the UK. At the end of November they chaired a meeting combining senior members from several organisations working to develop a joint strategy and action plan.
ReplyDeleteThe Daily Mirror reported on a 20 year old man initiating legal proceedings against the doctor who performed a NTC on him as an infant because of his parents’ religious beliefs. The young man has been in regular contact with the SMF.
The Daily Telegraph reported on a paper recently published in the Journal Clinical Ethics concluding that current GMC and BMA guidance to doctors is itself unethical in that it allows parents to procure a non-therapeutic, irreversible surgical procedure on their children to satisfy their own religious beliefs. The author of the paper, Dr David Shaw, is a lecturer in ethics at Glasgow University.
The SMF will be contacting both the BMA and the GMC asking them to revisit their respective guidelines. Members of the NSS may wish to contact their MPs, NHS trusts and local media to bring these developments to their attention and to raise public awareness. "
GREAT NEWS! Hopefully it is just a matter of time before the United States and other countries follow.
Here is the link to the the Daily Telegraph report for those of you who are interested.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/rebecca-smith/6662199/Circumcising-boys-for-religious-reasons-could-breach-Human-Rights-Act.html
In response to the anonymous comment dated December 12, 2009 12:59 PM:
ReplyDeleteGREAT NEWS! Hopefully it is just a matter of time before the United States and other countries follow.
I'm not sure why you're calling this "news", or interpreting it as the actions of a country. It is neither, really. It summarises activist actions by three parties: an anonymous man suing a doctor, the "Secular Medical Forum" (which appears to be a committee of the National Secular Society), and an ethics lecturer who has written a paper (which has apparently been the subject of some criticism).
If you think about it, people have already sued doctors in the United States; activist organisations have tried to end non-therapeutic circumcision in the United States; and US citizens have written papers claiming that non-therapeutic circumcision is unethical. So what you call for has already happened.
And, like many misguided activist campaigns, these have had essentially no effect. Sure, these people would like something to change, but that doesn't mean it will.
This is a great post, I've been waiting to share my thoughts on this for a long time (I'm the same person, just been busy lately).
ReplyDeleteMy dad got himself circumcised when he was in his twenties, but for some reason I was not when I was born (I'm 20 now). When I was little my mom said I could have it done later in life if I wanted to. I've been thinking a lot about it now and to be honest I feel inadeqacy of not being circumcised. As in what would it be like if I was, why wasn't I cut, what would women think, thinking about the procedure itself, that circumcised will always look better, with some uncertainty and wondering of how would sex/masturbation and everything else be different if I did get circumcised.
I remember when I was younger the foreskin's adhesion separated and started collecting smegma. It was not a good expeirence and I was scared something was wrong with it (like it was coming apart) but was too embarassed to tell anyone. So for some time I just left it alone and hoped it would "heal". No one told me about the smegma and hygiene, and washing is still like a chore.
If I have a son in the future, he will be circumcised. For his own satisfaction, for his well being, for his future lovers, and that he won't have to go through the insecurities and scares that I've been through.
I'm an uncirced father of a circed son. Sounds very much like sues experience. My wife, who had experience with both styles prior to marriage, insisted on circumcision for any sons. She has also hinted that she would strongly prefer me to have it done as well.
ReplyDeleteI think that you are overlooking many, many facts. Perhaps this link will be informative:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.mothering.com/health/protect-your-uncircumcised-son-expert-medical-advice-parents
Jim Frawley
Boston
I divorced my wife as she wanted to mutilate my twin sons. I am not circumcised and no male in my family has ever been cut.It is not normal to cut things off you are born with. The skin is there for a reason.
ReplyDeleteWe had our son circumcised at birth, Dad is uncut still and we decided it was best for son to have it done. I suppose its not the normal to have an uncut father with cut sons, but what is normal nowadays. we are both very happy with our decision.
ReplyDeletei thank you so much Jai Mata Sunlight... for ending the sufferings in my home. my husband wanted to divorce me thinking i am the cause of his problems that he contacted a spell caster and they told him that i am the cause of his darkest moments. i am really happy to share how you bless us unexpectedly even more than we could ever acquired if we were to work for it i thank you mother. for this what you did, if i should give you money, it is not enough..so i praise great jai mata sunlight...readers if you want to join me in testimonies contact sunlightmata@gmail.com and expect a perfect miracle in your life. with lots of testimonies and blessings.
ReplyDelete