OMG, it's a circumcision debate!

[conuly]

Man, I haven't seen a good one of these in ages, people are all too polite!

And already we've got some good comments. "I'm so happy I was circumcised!" leads to "That's great, good for you, but you didn't have a choice in the matter." leads to "YES HE DID! HE SAID HE'S HAPPY, DIDN'T HE????"

Apparently this guy never learned that babies can't consent for shit. Not for necessary things (appendectomies) nor optional things (circumcision).

But my favorite has to be the comment or two talking about how people with their penises in the natural state "risk" the horrors of smegma. (Gosh that's a fun word to type. Smegma, smegma, smegma.)

After my shocked and horrified comment that one should never ever ever ever EVER retract their darling baby's foreskin (EVER!) until their darling baby can do it himself (at which point you still shouldn't be doing that because, dude, let's not play with our kids' penises!) I wandered off and looked up "smegma" at Wikipedia.

Aside from confirming that it's not a guy-only thing (I knew that) this is what they have to say on the subject:

In males, smegma helps keep the glans moist and facilitates sexual intercourse by acting as a lubricant.

I am shocked and appalled that this happens. Shocked. And appalled! The horrors! We must never let anybody have this happen to them ever again. Because that sounds terrible.

Okay, I mean, it does in that bodily secretions always *do* sound kinda gross - but honestly, if you're wondering now whether or not you should circumcise your son or yourself, I suggest you don't lose too much sleep over the smegma issue.

Comments

[leora.livejournal.com]

I was looking up info on smegma recently actually (these things happen), and I learned something interesting. Females (well, uncircumcised ones) tend to produce more than males (circumcised or uncircumcised). One of the points made to all those women talking about the horrors of smegma is - how do you deal with your own? What would you do about a baby daughter and all that evil disgusting smegma she'll produce?

Actually, I got a bit annoyed at some web sites. Some reported smegma more neutrally as a secretion and so forth and some stated it is foul. It turns out, many people actually don't find it foul. In fact, I bet a lot of those people ranting and raving about how horrible smegma is and cutting their baby boys have been dealing with it either by simply washing their own regularly or quite possibly sexually enjoying their partner's in all sorts of ways.

But mainly, I am bitter. Women are often made to feel bad when there isn't enough lubrication for sex and artificial lubrication is needed. This shouldn't be happening anyway, but it does happen. Now I find out that not only does this happen, but men have been turned into slackers who were supposed to be providing some of that lubrication and now most of them do not. Maybe there'd be enough lubrication if women weren't expected to do their part and his part. Maybe it's not that she's too dry but that he is. The slacker. (And no, it's not his fault, and it's not that hard to get artificial lube, and he's the victim here, but I hadn't realized women were also being cheated and then blamed for it until recently. So, I've been long against forced mutilation, this other part is kind of a new issue.)

[leora.livejournal.com]

Reading through comments... some thoughts...

There's actually a movement, although I think it's small, within Judaism to end circumcision. But the big thing that would influence Jews not to circumcise and make it religiously more okay (although it'd be a really tough sell and you'd have to move the cultural opinion first to make this work) would be making it illegal. Jews are supposed to follow the law of the land (with a few exceptions if the law of the land means actively worshiping other gods, denouncing their own, murdering innocents, or I think committing incest). You can get a lot of religious exceptions for legal necessity. So, if it became culturally desirable to not circumcise then a lot of Jews would want to not (although not the Orthodox and Chassidic), but they'd need a push, and the law would help them give them the motivation. Then get some rabbis telling them it's okay and that they can take a symbolic blood drop instead, and I think you could make it work religiously for most Jews in the US (and really upset a minority of them).

But the commenter is right, there are a lot of things that Jews don't do any more, and it's because Jews are great at finding interpretations. They could do it again.

As to penises look weird if they aren't circumcised... I hate to break this to guys, but penises look weird. You can cut them or not, and they will still look weird. I say this as a straight female who is fond of some males. Guys can be great. They still look weird. That's okay though. Just accept that it looks weird. Honestly, bodies generally look a bit weird, especially if you really focus on the details. I think knees look really weird. You can live with having some bits that look a bit weird. If this is a serious esteem issue, maybe we need more work on body acceptance for everyone. I doubt it'd be a bad thing to work on and promote.

Oh, and I object to piercing babies too. It's not as bad, because it can often heal, so it isn't necessarily permanent, but I think it's a bad idea. I may have mentioned this, but my sisters wanted me pierced as a baby, because they figured it'd save me the effort and I'd want it when I grew up anyway. I never did want it, and I was glad my mother refused and said I could get it done if I wanted it done when I was old enough to choose. I also don't see the difference between piercing ears and most other body parts that don't get in the way of things like belly buttons, eyebrows, and noses. It's all just extra holes to stick stuff into it. And I've always felt that I needed my ears pierced like I need another hole in my head. (Although I admit, some earrings are attractive, and I have seen some eyebrow rings that look nice. I just don't think any of it is nice enough to justify putting extra holes in my body.) But piercings, when done safely and cared for properly, don't tend to cause many problems or have much affect on any sort of functioning, so it's a much lesser issue. Although the same general principle of why make a potentially permanent decision that is so unnecessary when you can easily wait with little downside?

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

??? "The horrors of smegma"? People don't know that everybody has smegma, particularly women, but also circumcised males? Oh the horror.

LOL, my teenage boyfriend at summer camp used to call it "Framunda cheese", because it came framunda dere.

There's no medical reason for circumcision, and as a religious tradition it's downright creepy. As a cosmetic surgical procedure, it's a minor one in infancy but a major one in adulthood, so if it's going to be done at all, that's when it ought to be done. I don't see it as genital mutilation, don't think it should be illegal, but would like to see it become unfashionable.

LOL, so true, "all penises look weird"; so they do. All genitalia of any variety, actually. Bodies are just intrinsically weird, and biological processes and products are intrinsically gross; it doesn't do to dwell on the matter too much. Yeah, smeg happens. There are worse things.

I don't hold with piercing babies' ears. Where's the thrill of that? Getting your ears pierced is supposed to be a Rite of Passage, that you beg and pester your Mom for over the course of several years until she finally gives in and takes you to the piercing store, where you chicken out and go home to think about it till your next birthday, when you finally REALLY DO IT, and pick out your first-ever earrings, and feel so proud. And then you don't take proper care of the holes, so they get infected and you have to deal with it, and hopefully learn something from that. It's supposed to be a sign that one is not a baby any more, but old enough to bear some pain and some responsibility .