By Dr. Christiane Northrup
Posted with permission.
First printed (2004) in Men's Health Magazine.
Circumcision, the surgical removal of the male prepuce (foreskin), usually during the first few days after birth, is an emotionally charged subject that most people are reluctant to discuss openly, let alone objectively.
I know. As an obstetrician-gynecologist, I've performed hundreds of circumcisions, and I've been on the front lines of the circumcision debate for more than 25 years.
Though I've provided information on circumcision for expectant couples for years, it long ago became clear to me that the decision about whether or not to circumcise a boy is made from an emotional not a rational place. Still, the tide is turning as more and more people, both within and without the medical profession, rethink the entire subject.
In the spirit of science and compassion, I urge you to read this article with an open mind. It may well change the entire way you view circumcision.
A Risky, Painful, and Unnecessary Procedure
The sad truth is that throughout most of the 20th century, the American medical community has focused on finding reasons to remove the foreskin of newborn males instead of acknowledging Mother Nature's wisdom in including this highly sensitive tissue. Happily, more and more individuals are questioning circumcision's necessity and acknowledging its potential harm. Since 1980, the national circumcision rate has dropped by 30 percent, and an increasing number of physicians are finding the courage to refuse to perform the procedure.
This is precisely what happened in England, a nation formerly obsessed with circumcision. In the 1940s, following the release of information that supported leaving male babies fully intact, England's circumcision rate plummeted almost overnight to less than I percent. Similar information is beginning to gain ground here in the United States, so I'd like to share it with you.
To start with, babies feel pain the same way adults do. But the prevailing wisdom at medical schools has long been that newborns can't feel pain and therefore don't experience it during their circumcisions.
When I was a medical student, this is what I heard from my professors as well, although common sense told me it wasn't true. I watched placid newborns begin to scream and gasp in pain as the circumcision procedure began. Fortunately, it is finally accepted as a medical fact that circumcision is extraordinarily painful for newborns, who are born with full nocioceptive (pain sensing) ability.
Furthermore, routine newborn circumcision has no health benefit. Though a wide variety of health advantages have been attributed to circumcision--decreases in the incidence of cervical cancer, AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases, and male urinary tract infection--the most up-to-date research has refuted all these justifications. In fact, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement in 1999 saying there is not sufficient scientific data to recommend routine newborn circumcision. Given this, the number of insurance companies willing to pay for the procedure is also decreasing.
Though circumcision is relatively easy to perform, like any surgical procedure it has risks. The most common complication is hemorrhage, which is reported in as many as 2 percent of cases. Though rare, more disastrous complications can and do occur: "degloving" of the penile skin, which requires skin grafts and results in loss of sensation; destruction of the penis; and death from hemorrhage or infection.
Because there are no proven benefits for the procedure in the first place, these complications are all the more tragic. As respected obstetrician and gynecologist George Denniston points out, "Circumcision violates the first tenet of medical practice: 'first, do no harm.' According to modern medical ethics, parents do not have the right to consent to a procedure that is not in their son's best interest. The removal of a normal, important part of the male sexual organ is not in their son's best interest."
Posted with permission.
First printed (2004) in Men's Health Magazine.
Circumcision, the surgical removal of the male prepuce (foreskin), usually during the first few days after birth, is an emotionally charged subject that most people are reluctant to discuss openly, let alone objectively.
I know. As an obstetrician-gynecologist, I've performed hundreds of circumcisions, and I've been on the front lines of the circumcision debate for more than 25 years.
Though I've provided information on circumcision for expectant couples for years, it long ago became clear to me that the decision about whether or not to circumcise a boy is made from an emotional not a rational place. Still, the tide is turning as more and more people, both within and without the medical profession, rethink the entire subject.
In the spirit of science and compassion, I urge you to read this article with an open mind. It may well change the entire way you view circumcision.
A Risky, Painful, and Unnecessary Procedure
The sad truth is that throughout most of the 20th century, the American medical community has focused on finding reasons to remove the foreskin of newborn males instead of acknowledging Mother Nature's wisdom in including this highly sensitive tissue. Happily, more and more individuals are questioning circumcision's necessity and acknowledging its potential harm. Since 1980, the national circumcision rate has dropped by 30 percent, and an increasing number of physicians are finding the courage to refuse to perform the procedure.
This is precisely what happened in England, a nation formerly obsessed with circumcision. In the 1940s, following the release of information that supported leaving male babies fully intact, England's circumcision rate plummeted almost overnight to less than I percent. Similar information is beginning to gain ground here in the United States, so I'd like to share it with you.
To start with, babies feel pain the same way adults do. But the prevailing wisdom at medical schools has long been that newborns can't feel pain and therefore don't experience it during their circumcisions.
When I was a medical student, this is what I heard from my professors as well, although common sense told me it wasn't true. I watched placid newborns begin to scream and gasp in pain as the circumcision procedure began. Fortunately, it is finally accepted as a medical fact that circumcision is extraordinarily painful for newborns, who are born with full nocioceptive (pain sensing) ability.
Furthermore, routine newborn circumcision has no health benefit. Though a wide variety of health advantages have been attributed to circumcision--decreases in the incidence of cervical cancer, AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases, and male urinary tract infection--the most up-to-date research has refuted all these justifications. In fact, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement in 1999 saying there is not sufficient scientific data to recommend routine newborn circumcision. Given this, the number of insurance companies willing to pay for the procedure is also decreasing.
Though circumcision is relatively easy to perform, like any surgical procedure it has risks. The most common complication is hemorrhage, which is reported in as many as 2 percent of cases. Though rare, more disastrous complications can and do occur: "degloving" of the penile skin, which requires skin grafts and results in loss of sensation; destruction of the penis; and death from hemorrhage or infection.
Because there are no proven benefits for the procedure in the first place, these complications are all the more tragic. As respected obstetrician and gynecologist George Denniston points out, "Circumcision violates the first tenet of medical practice: 'first, do no harm.' According to modern medical ethics, parents do not have the right to consent to a procedure that is not in their son's best interest. The removal of a normal, important part of the male sexual organ is not in their son's best interest."
Intact is the Norm
The vast majority of the world's men, including most Europeans and Scandinavians, are intact. And before 1900, circumcision was virtually non-existent in the United States as well--except for Jewish and Muslim people, who've been performing genital cutting for hundreds of years for religious reasons.
Believe it or not, circumcision was introduced in English-speaking countries in the late 1800s to control or prevent masturbation, similar to the way that female circumcision was promoted and continues to be advocated in some Muslim and African countries to control women's sexuality. As the absurdity of this position became apparent, new justifications, such as the prevention of cervical and penile cancers, received the blessing of the medical establishment. But these are justifications that science has been unable to support. Nor is there any scientific proof that circumcision prevents sexually transmitted diseases.
Also contrary to popular belief, the intact penis requires no special care. Many parents get hung up about how to "clean" the intact penis in an infant. Some are even told to retract the foreskin. This can cause pain and scarring, and it isn't necessary. The foreskin often does not retract naturally until a child is older--sometimes not until he is a teenager--but a boy can easily stretch and retract his foreskin gently over several months' time.
The Pleasures of Natural Sex
I've always felt that the male foreskin, one of most richly innervated and hyper-elastic pieces of tissue in the male body, is there for a reason. Until recently, I didn't know exactly what that reason was. But now, thanks to Kristen O'Hara's well-researched book, Sex as Nature Intended It, I finally understand the reasons for the design of the penis and foreskin and how this design ensures optimal penile function, including this organ's ability to satisfy the female sexually. Most American women have not personally experienced the sensation of sex with an uncircumcised man because the majority of men in this country, especially those born before 1980, have been circumcised. But Kristen O'Hara's long-ago affair with an uncircumcised man was the spark that touched off years of research, the result of which is her eye-opening book. Consider the following:
The primary pleasure zones of the natural (intact) penis are located in the upper penis, which includes the penis head, the foreskin's inner lining, and the frenulum--the hinge of skin that connects the foreskin to the head of the penis. When a male is circumcised, some of the most erotically sensitive areas of the penis are removed: the foreskin that normally covers the head of the penis (the glans) and some or all of the frenulum.
The frenulum contains high concentrations of nerve endings that are sensitive to fine touch. The glans was designed by nature to be covered all the time except during sexual activity. Upon erection, both foreskin layers unfold onto the upper penile shaft, leaving the highly innervated frenulum, glans, and inner lining exposed and readied for sexual activity. This is one of reasons why the penile tip is the focus of sexual excitement.
New scientific evidence shows that highly erogenous tissue equivalent to the female clitoris is located in the core of the penis, beneath the corona (the hook-like head of the penis) and coronal tip. This sensitive tissue extends all the way down the length of the penile shaft to the pubic mound, where it branches and continues into the pelvis and onto the pelvic bone in a manner analogous to the anatomy of the female clitoris. Though the penis contains nerves that are sexually excited by pressure, its tip contains the greatest density of these nerves and is therefore the most sexually responsive part, just as the tip of the clitoris is the most sensitive part. And like the tip of the female clitoris, the tip of the penis is sexually stimulated by the pleasurable sensations created by the massaging actions of the movement of the foreskin upon it during intercourse.
During intercourse, these exquisitely sensitive nerves of the upper penis both excite a man sexually and control the rhythm of penile thrusting. "When the natural penis thrusts inward, the vaginal walls brush against the erotically sensitive nerves of the glans, the foreskin's inner lining, and the frenulum, causing these nerves to fire off sensations of pleasure;" writes O'Hara. "The inward thrust of the penis keeps these pleasure sensations ongoing, but after these nerves have fired, the penis senses a reduction in pleasurable feelings, so it stops its inward thrust and begins its outward stroke in search of stronger sensations.
"During the outward stroke, the foreskin's outer layer slides forward to cloak the nerves of its inner lining, while the inner lining itself covers the frenulum" she continues. "Once covered, these nerves are allowed to rest from stimulation until the next inward thrust. As the foreskin moves forward on the shaft, it bunches up behind the coronal ridge, and may sometimes roll forward over the corona, depending upon the length of the stroke. This applies pressure to the interior tissue of the corona and coronal ridge where nerves that are excited by pressure send a wave of sexual excitement throughout the upper penis. The natural penis receives pleasure sensations from one set of sensory nerves on the inward thrust and a different set of nerves on the outward stroke. It can maintain a continuous stream of highly pleasurable sensations by maintaining the right rhythm."
And intriguingly, because the area of sexual sensation is so localized in the tip, the penis only has to travel a short distance to excite one set of nerves or another. In other words, it doesn't have to withdraw very far to receive pleasure on the outward stroke. This allows the penis to stay deep inside the vagina, keeping the man's pubic mound in close and frequent contact with a woman's clitoral area, which increases her pleasure and a sense of closeness.
As part of the research for her book, Ms. O'Hara surveyed approximately 150 women--enough to make the study statistically reliable. Here's how one survey respondent described sex with a natural partner:
"Sex with a natural partner has been to me like the gentle rhythm of a peaceful but powerful ocean--waves build, then subside and soothe. It felt so natural, as if it were filling a deep need within me, not necessarily for the act of sex, but more in order to experience the rhythm of a man and woman as they were created to respond to each other."
The Sexual Consequences of Male Circumcision
After circumcision, the exposed head of the penis thickens like a callus and becomes less sensitive. And because erotically sensitive areas of the penis have been removed, the circumcised penis must thrust more vigorously with a much longer stroke in order to reach orgasm through stimulating the less sensitive penile shaft. In her study of women who have had sexual experiences with both natural and circumcised men, O'Hara notes that respondents overwhelmingly concurred that the mechanics of coitus were different for the two groups of men. Seventy-three percent of the women reported that circumcised men tended to thrust harder, using elongated strokes; while intact men tended to thrust more gently, to have shorter strokes, and to maintain more contact between the mons pubis and clitoris.
O'Hara's research makes the following sexual comparisons between the natural and circumcised penis.
The natural penis may be more comfortable for the vagina than the circumcised penis. The coronal ridge of the natural penis is more flexible; O'Hara likens it to the resiliency of Jell-O. The circumcised penile head is considerably harder--overly firm and compacted like an unripe tomato. This is because circumcision cuts away 33-50 percent of penile skin. As a result, the skin of the penile shaft can get stretched so tightly during an erection that it pulls down on the skin covering the glans, compressing the tissue of the penis head. The abnormally hardened coronal ridge can then be very uncomfortable to vaginal tissue during intercourse.
Women sometimes experience a scraping feeling with each outward stroke and even report discomfort after intercourse or even the next day. The brain makes pain-relieving endorphins that may partially block any discomfort during intercourse itself. As a gynecologist, I can tell you that painful intercourse is a very common symptom in women, many of whom blame themselves or who feel that something is wrong with their sexual response.
The give of the natural penis, by contrast, allows for more bend and flex of the organ in the vagina, adding to a woman's pleasure and comfort. The abundant skin of the natural penile shaft further cushions the force of the coronal ridge in the vagina. In addition, the mobile skin of the penis is "grasped" by the ridges of the vaginal mucosa and held in place. The bunching and unbunching of penile skin during intercourse enhances a man's pleasure, but it also excites the woman. As one of O'Hara s survey respondents reported: "What I noticed was that my natural man got a lot of pleasure from deliberate, slow insertion and backing out because his foreskin would fold back and forth, which would excite me also."
Circumcised sex may cause the vagina to abnormally tense up and decrease its lubrication. Women report more problems with lubrication when having sex with circumcised men, possibly because of irritation from the harder tip and involuntary tensing against it, and also because the longer stroke length tends to remove lubrication from the vagina. Often an artificial lubricant is necessary.
Intercourse may also be painful for the circumcised man because his penis scrapes against the ribbed structure of tensed-up vaginal walls and becomes over stimulated from constant pressure. The degree of discomfort, if any, will depend upon the tightness of the man's shaft skin, the vigor of his thrusting, the duration of intercourse, and the amount of lubrication.
Circumcision may cause a man to work harder to achieve orgasm, resulting in emotional and physical distancing from his partner. When a circumcised man has sex, he may have to concentrate intensely on the erotic sensations he is receiving while simultaneously blocking out any uncomfortable sensations. Survey respondents often reported that their circumcised partners seemed to have to work too hard to achieve orgasm. And because of the erotic tissue that has been removed, he can't enjoy the sensations leading up to orgasm or his partner's responses.
O'Hara makes a compelling argument that circumcised intercourse may frustrate the primordial subconscious that seems to know "real sex ain't this way." She also suggests that each circumcised experience has the potential to buildup negative memory imprints so that over time, repeated sexual encounters with the same partner may lead to negative feelings between the two that carry over into everyday life. If this sounds like an extraordinary leap, consider the question that O'Hara asks in her book: "Other things being equal, which couple is more likely to stay together--one enjoying delicious, satisfying sex or one whose sexual pleasure is being compromised in many ways?"
The Solution: Foreskin Restoration
Fortunately, there are alternatives for men (and their partners) who want to experience natural sex. This quiet revolution, called Foreskin Restoration, can be achieved through plastic surgery or non surgical methods. The latter work on the principle that skin stretches and grows under pressure just like abdominal skin when it stretches to accommodate pregnancy. According to O'Hara, whose husband stretched his foreskin over the course of several years, their sex life is better than ever, and neither can believe the difference that foreskin restoration has made. Many other men and women attest to this improvement as well.
For more information, the following resources can be helpful.
National Organization of Restoring Men (NORM) Web site: http://www.norm.org
The Joy of Uncircumcising! A restoration manual and more, by Jim Bigelow, Ph.D. (Contact UNCIRC, POB 52138, Pacific Grove, CA 93950).
Restore Yourself! A Handy Kit for Circumcised Men from NOCIRC of Michigan Web site: www.RestoreYourself.com
Non-Surgical Foreskin Restoration, a Canadian Web site with a great deal of information: http://infocirc.org/top.htm
What about Religious Circumcision?
I am not Jewish (or Muslim), but I can assure you that many are rethinking circumcision. As a matter of fact, two of the most well-researched and eloquent books on the harmful nature of circumcision have been written by Jewish men. For more information, I urge you to read Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma by Ronald Goldman, Ph.D., (Vanguard, 1997), Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy by Edward Wallerstein (Springer Publishing, 1980) and watch CUT: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision. For additional information on the Jewish perspective, see these links. For the Christian perspective, see these links. For circumcision within Islam visit http://www.quranicpath.com/misconceptions/circumcision.html and http://www.quran.org/khatne.htm.
I hope this has been an eye-opening article. I realize that circumcision may not have been the topic uppermost on your mind before you opened your issue [of Men's Health] this month, but it's my mission to bring you timely, life-enhancing information. My hope is that you'll weigh it and then make the wisest choice for yourself and your family.
For more on how male circumcision impacts women's sexual health, see the articles on this page.
For additional information on the prepuce, intact care, and circumcision see: Should I Circumcise? The Pros and Cons of Infant Circumcision
•••••••
Great article.. my hubby is intact but my son isn't. i was young and naive and just went with what my friends were doing with thier sons and now i regret having my son circumcised. I have even told him that i am sorry i had that done to him when he was a baby. He is 16 now!
ReplyDeleteI had one intact lover and I can tell you that it was mind-blowingly different from being with a cut man. I thought I would pass out from the pleasure. Now I know that it wasn't so much that particular guy that was so fantastic - it was the intact penis. If only circumcising mothers knew what they were really doing to their sons and their future partners....sigh.
ReplyDeleteBrilliant article.
ReplyDeleteI have a rare man who is British and circumcised and like most British men who were done and not religious it was for medical reasons as was his father and youngest son. It's not even "medical reasons" there is a deformity that runs through the family, they tried to repair it on my partner as a baby which started at 12 hours with him being given a bag, but after a number of operations it wasn't possible. My stepson was left after what happened to his dad to see if it would right itself and it wouldn't.
I'm aware of the difference and do miss it, we try to make up for it in other ways, but it can never really be the same.
As far as religious circumcision goes it's not supposed to be this extreme version practiced in America, it was a nick - not that I'm defending it but anyone who says they're getting it done for religious reasons and cuts it all off should know what they're really being asked. Christians who make that argument make me angry, the Bible says if you're going to circumcise you should follow all the law.
I'm glad to be British and not have to worry about this issue, but glad to see people fighting the anti-circ fight over there.
What makes me sad is that my husband is cut, and while I feel feelings of loss and grief for our sexual relationship, he doesn't seem to care. I want him to restore, but he's just not interested. I've shared information with him. I don't know what else to do. I feel like I'm truly missing out on something in our relationship - emotionally and physically.
ReplyDeletePlease don't be so upset. This is not something he can change. He blocks it out to not think about it. I am circumcised. I wish I was not. I must move on with my life. Please be kind to him and enjoy him to the fullest extent. Being bitter about this is not the answer. My girlfriend seems to enjoy me thoroughly. To think an uncut man would give her more pleasure is painful. So why would I want to admit it, anymore than your man wants to admit the same.
DeleteAll I can say is that I've only had one intact partner and I married him. :)
ReplyDeleteAll three of my sons are intact - I hope their future partners appreciate it.
I had no idea that circumcision was so prevalent in other parts of the world. Here in Australia it's not particularly common, and the government-operated hospital in which I gave birth routinely makes mothers of baby boys read through a large folder of anti-circumcision medical literature.
ReplyDeleteMidwives in Australia now "encourage" you not to circumcise boys as it is an unnecessary procedure that involves incredible pain on an infant.
ReplyDeleteMy husband was not circumcised and neither was my son thankfully.. however even with midwives in pre-natal classes advising against it, some do it because the father is - using the excuse "if they see each other in the shower they will think they are different" - i say... how observant is a child to notice such a thing?... and when they do maybe it's time to stop having showers with them! lol.... just a thought :)
It is amazing to me how many pregnant women in the US DON'T want to talk about it. They use the Christian dogma ignorantly--if you are a Christian, then you follow the New Testament in which Jesus clearly states "Let them be circumcised of the spirit," so that argument is erroneous. Or the even more infuriating "I want him to look like his dad." If his dad lost a leg in a car crash--would you want your son to have one amputated for family solidarity? I am the PROUD mom of an intact son and a circ'd husband who knows it's the right thing...left as God intended! Thank you for your informative article!
ReplyDeleteGreat article. This is the kind of stuff that needs to be put out there. I live in the US, and like most other American women, I have been with circumcised guys in the past. Let's just say I'm really glad my husband is intact. It's a big difference.
ReplyDeleteKnowing this, can you imagine how ill it makes me when some person tells me they had their son cut because they think his future wife will thank them for it? (Yes, I have had people give that as a reason for cutting babies. How gross.) I wish my mother-in-law were alive so I could thank her for having the nerve to stand up for her son and keep him intact even though nobody was doing it back then (1975) and she faced extreme pressure to circ. As his wife, I appreciate it!
Great article. We need more medical professionals weighing in on this important subject, and calling out the erroneous health facts that are floating around. It's amazing what people will believe, even doctors! And shouldn't a doctor of ALL people actually know what a natural penis is like and how it functions??????
ReplyDeleteMy hubby was circumcised at only 15 minutes old and I've never been with a natural man. Wish I'd had the chance to from what I read here though! ;) Anyways, I'm pregnant and he wants to circumcise if it's a boy, but I say over my dead body. He thinks that he'd be doing his son a favor by circumcising because it desensitizes the head and allows him to go on for longer, but it's kinda hard to tell him that it hurts because he goes on for so long and sometimes for no apparent reason afterwards! All I can do is say no and stand my ground to save our son's genital integrity, but I'm hoping that it doesn't screw up our marriage. He feels just as strongly that boys should be circumcised as I do that they shouldn't. :(
ReplyDeleteMy ex husband was circumcised, and it caused a LOT of problems sexually. He felt discomfort from lack of lubrication and it was exhausting for him BECAUSE he had to go on for so long. He also had to pull farther back on the outward stroke just to get satisfaction himself. I personally, could never orgasm. It was often uncomfortable or sometimes downright painful for me. I'm not saying it was never good, but it was DEFINITELY trying on our sex life.
ReplyDeleteMy current husband, however, is intact. I will say, the sex is mind-blowing. It's almost never uncomfortable, rarely ever lubrication issues, and me- the one that thought I couldn't orgasm from sex, will do so regularly now. This is a conversation I've actually had with friends, and the general consensus seems to be that intact is better. (From both male and female friends) I realize the guys haven't experienced both, but I've had several friends question if their altered state was better. Some of those did believe it caused them problems. And, I've never had an intact guy friend say they wished it different, and even would go onto say they appreciated it.
Anonymous, my husband is cut, our sons are not. He was easy to win over, I was lucky. I think it might be good for your husband to read some of the articles about circumcision here, and (though I hate to think it would take so much) if necessary the article about the poor boy whose resulting infection required massive skin grafting. Just be warned, the images on that article are incredibly grisly. Start with the ones like this on sexual implications and perhaps just that alone would help. Good luck!
ReplyDeleteGood article. My girlfriend recommended I read it. I am non-Jewish as we like to call it, but having used condoms my whole adult life I hadn't had much commentary until having sex au naturale with my current girlfriend. She gushes over the feel and performance. She talks about it a lot tool.
ReplyDeleteI'm struggling with a lot of anger after reading this, because this describes so well some of the trouble I have with sex with my circumcised husband. He insists that there is no issue, and since it wasn't his fault it seems wrong for me to tell him that actually, sex isn't as great as it was cracked up to be and I think the reason for that is that part of his penis is missing! How do you have that conversation? Or is it selfish of me to want to discuss this, since we can't really change it? (I am very, very doubtful that he would consider any form of foreskin restoration.) I don't want to emasculate him by implying that he can't satisfy me, because I probably do have orgasms 25-50% of the time, so it isn't fair. I guess I'll just wait until we have a boy, and if he insists on circumcising, I'll point him over here.
ReplyDeleteGood choice. I highly recommend standing your ground about the child being intact. When circumcised men wake up to the facts they are not at all comfortable. It's as fatal emotionally as if someone were to cut off your vagina lips, making your vagina slightly looser than most women. Imagine if he had that conversation with you, "Honey, I'm sorry but you're not as tight as other women I've been with...it's a fact and I miss that tightness..(even though you can never get it back)" You should love the man for who he is.
DeleteWhat about the immunological functions that are lost after circumcision? What about the fact that, according to Davidson's study in 1977, circumcision makes fungal infection asymptomatic, potentially leading to more serious problems? What about the recent study done by de Witte et al in 2007 into Langerhans cells and how they trap and neutralize viruses? What about the beneficial microflora supported by the foreskin and how they combat bacterial and fungal infection? All of these functions are lost to circumcision, yet no one ever seems to talk about it. Why is that?
ReplyDeleteSources:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1045367/pdf/brjvendis00044-0041.pdf
http://www.circumcisionandhiv.com/files/de_Witte_2007.pdf
i am 13 and cut and so is most of the males in my family. i was feeling paranoid and upset about it affecting my life in the future and after reading the comments i am actually kinda ashamed. it got out at my old school and i was getting abuse shouted at me, i was losing friends and people laughed at me, i was lucky enough to move away but please for the love of god please do not "cut" your child it leaves them feeling insecure,inferior and paranoid about ther own body
ReplyDeleteI invite all you women above who reveal that your marital sex lives have been damaged by the circumcisions of your partners, to share your stories in confidence with the admin of the following Group. I can vouch for its woman-friendliness.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.facebook.com/index.php?stype=lo&lh=Ac-KvAUNqesyV1v3#!/womenarevictimstoo?fref=ts
I am 17 and circumcised, and after reading a bunch of comments on here and a bunch of articles and seeing pictures, I too was feeling very upset and paranoid about it affecting my life in the future.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was just the way I was, but after reading a bunch of articles, I felt like I someone had chopped off my hand or something. When I have a child and if it is a boy, he is staying intact.
I really hate my parents for doing this to me, but I don't have the courage to ask them about it. >.>
You shouldn't hate your parents for something they thought was best at the time ..You are 17 so they done something right your not dead they gave you life and they love you and loving your child is all that is important hate is a big word ..The bible says if you some one it's the same as murder so be careful in what you say ..
DeleteI am an uncircumcised man that was born in the 80's at a time when I was the odd man out other then one other guy I know of, everyone in school I knew was circumcised... Let me tell you, him and I were the "different" ones and we were often became the butt of jokes... Elephant penis sticks out in my mind as one thing I was called.
ReplyDeleteI very much feel for anyone that is being harassed about the subject, try not to let it bother you because ur body is your own!
If you want to belame someone or something the medical profession is a good one, they need to be more scientific about more of what they do and "know" less! Stop cutting up people and start healing them! Stop telling people to take drugs and start teaching people to be healthy, eat well and get the proper rest!
The sad fact is ur parents probably were talked into it, because it was more hygenic or "Looks better", while talking to them about it I feel is important the belame should be placed on the medical profession that allows this type of barbaric ritual to go on! Removing a womans forskin doesn't happen in our culture and it's time we stopped doing it to our boys!
I am a circumcised 42 year old man and I feel robbed. It has made me angry at my parents for doing this to me. I can't understand how anyone could think it's OK to lop off a part of a child's body without their consent. It is a basic human rights issue. If a parent wanted a doctor to lop off their son's pinky finger when he was born this would be considered barbaric. I'd gladly lose a pinky finger to get my foreskin back.
ReplyDeleteI discovered this conversation from a shared post on fb. I'm pleased to be able to state that I was a stubborn mother who, at only 19 years old, refused to circumcise my newborn son. His 18 year old father actually stated in no uncertain terms that the child would be "au naturel", just like his dad. I totally agreed, and in the hospital, I had to argue with drs, nurses, and my Mom (she was the most assertive about it)
ReplyDeleteThis article has really made me glad that I didn't cave. I don't know how my son thinks about this, he may never have considered about it. I wouldn't broach the subject - he's almost 40 now, and we don't talk about these things. LOL!
I have two boys and i was thinking of taking them to cut, but after reading this article, i cant even wish it done on my enemy.
ReplyDelete