On infant circumcision.
Feb. 11th, 2005 12:32 amHere's the thing. Parents do not own their children. Parents do not own their children's bodies.
Parents can't refuse lifesaving medical intervention for their children, even if their own religions forbid it, and they can't, ethically (screw the law, the law sucks) cause unnecessary damage to their children.
Circumcisions are unnecessary for the vast majority of boys. A small minority have diseases that do require the removal of an unhealthy foreskin.
An boy who will not be circumcised is not at risk of having part or all of the penis lopped off. This has happened, and not so long ago. A boy who will not be circumcised is at less of a risk of having infections during infancy, because the foreskin protects the penis from all the nasties in the diaper. A boy who is uncircumcised can grow up and change this. One who is circumcised can't. This is irreversible.
There is some evidence that removing the foreskin, even when it's done correctly, permanently impairs the ability to enjoy sex. Oh, not that guys still don't, but that it'd be easier if they were, y'know, intact. Like God made them. There is significant evidence that this sort of pain in infancy (and most circumcisions are still done without anesthesia) permanently rewires the pain receptors.
There are, of course, a number of good, perfectly valid reasons to circumcise.
1. Religion.
I'm not tackling this.
2. "He won't feel weird taking showers with other boys"
Does anybody still take showers like that anymore? No offense, but that seems like a way to encourage homosexuality, and I'm amazed the fundies still allow this.
At any rate, some 35% of infant males aren't circumcised. That's nearing half. These kids won't feel that weird.
3. "He should look like his daddy"
Is he a clone? No? Then he's not going to look like his daddy anyway. He'll live. And while I'm thrilled if you're actually comfortable with your own nudity, a lot of families who use this argument aren't. I don't know why they think their son will care.
4. "There are health benefits"
Actually, there really aren't, except that it helps you avoid cancer of the foreskin. And lopping off my breasts would help me avoid breast cancer, and performing routine appendectomies at birth would help people avoid appendecitis.
5. "It looks better"
Only if you're used to it. And dude? You're not fucking your son. If you are, you need to get serious help.
Well. Guess I didn't think these arguments were so valid after all.
Let's say I did. Let's say I really thought that circumcised guys look better, inherantly, and should all fit some obscure standard of conformity.
I still would be against routine infant circumcision.
In China, for many years they thought that small feet looked better, and bound girls feet, without their consent. This permanently damaged them. This is unacceptable.
If we thought that brands looked pretty, we still wouldn't find it acceptable to brand infants just because "it looks good" and "they won't remember it". We reject the concept of FGM, even though all these arguments have been used to justify it. Why is our custom different?
To be fair, I completely support the right of consenting adults to do whatever the fuck they want with their bodies. If you really want to cut off your labia, that's your own business. And if you really wish you'd been circumcised, and hate that foreskin, go ahead, get it chopped off. I support you.
But don't fuck with babies' private parts. You don't own them.
Parents can't refuse lifesaving medical intervention for their children, even if their own religions forbid it, and they can't, ethically (screw the law, the law sucks) cause unnecessary damage to their children.
Circumcisions are unnecessary for the vast majority of boys. A small minority have diseases that do require the removal of an unhealthy foreskin.
An boy who will not be circumcised is not at risk of having part or all of the penis lopped off. This has happened, and not so long ago. A boy who will not be circumcised is at less of a risk of having infections during infancy, because the foreskin protects the penis from all the nasties in the diaper. A boy who is uncircumcised can grow up and change this. One who is circumcised can't. This is irreversible.
There is some evidence that removing the foreskin, even when it's done correctly, permanently impairs the ability to enjoy sex. Oh, not that guys still don't, but that it'd be easier if they were, y'know, intact. Like God made them. There is significant evidence that this sort of pain in infancy (and most circumcisions are still done without anesthesia) permanently rewires the pain receptors.
There are, of course, a number of good, perfectly valid reasons to circumcise.
1. Religion.
I'm not tackling this.
2. "He won't feel weird taking showers with other boys"
Does anybody still take showers like that anymore? No offense, but that seems like a way to encourage homosexuality, and I'm amazed the fundies still allow this.
At any rate, some 35% of infant males aren't circumcised. That's nearing half. These kids won't feel that weird.
3. "He should look like his daddy"
Is he a clone? No? Then he's not going to look like his daddy anyway. He'll live. And while I'm thrilled if you're actually comfortable with your own nudity, a lot of families who use this argument aren't. I don't know why they think their son will care.
4. "There are health benefits"
Actually, there really aren't, except that it helps you avoid cancer of the foreskin. And lopping off my breasts would help me avoid breast cancer, and performing routine appendectomies at birth would help people avoid appendecitis.
5. "It looks better"
Only if you're used to it. And dude? You're not fucking your son. If you are, you need to get serious help.
Well. Guess I didn't think these arguments were so valid after all.
Let's say I did. Let's say I really thought that circumcised guys look better, inherantly, and should all fit some obscure standard of conformity.
I still would be against routine infant circumcision.
In China, for many years they thought that small feet looked better, and bound girls feet, without their consent. This permanently damaged them. This is unacceptable.
If we thought that brands looked pretty, we still wouldn't find it acceptable to brand infants just because "it looks good" and "they won't remember it". We reject the concept of FGM, even though all these arguments have been used to justify it. Why is our custom different?
To be fair, I completely support the right of consenting adults to do whatever the fuck they want with their bodies. If you really want to cut off your labia, that's your own business. And if you really wish you'd been circumcised, and hate that foreskin, go ahead, get it chopped off. I support you.
But don't fuck with babies' private parts. You don't own them.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 09:57 pm (UTC)However, the hospital really pushed it. Everywhere you went, they asked if you were doing it. My youngest was in NICU for 2 weeks, and once he was a bit stronger, they kept calling me telling me 'you forgot to sign the release for his circumcision'. I didn't forget a THING.
Finally I got a nurse who CRIED when I told her we weren't doing it. She said as a NICU nurse it really broke her heart -- starting with babies very small, very sick, then as soon as they are healthy enough to go home, they hold them down and cut off their foreskins. It's bad enough with normal kids, but imagine your kid fought for his life, was in agony for so long, and was alone in NICU for so long, and when that hell is almost over, you do more damage? Crazy.
With my second, too, the midwife asked, 'have you thought about circumcision' (we knew he was a boy) and when we told her that we did, and we weren't doing it, she said, 'oh, good, you won't need this, then' and put down the pile of anti-circ literature she had.
It's cosmetic surgery for babies, and that's nuts.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:06 pm (UTC)I'm against circumcision for many, many reasons. Ridiculously enough, my boyfriend is all for it (this is assuming we eventually have children). I'm not exactly sure how to put my foot down on that one, except for stating the fact that if they want it done as adults, they can make that choice, but if I take something away from them, they can't get it back.
It's not that I value my belief over his. It's just that following his wish would be irreversible.
Actually, I can't fathom the fact that he would want to mutilate someone the way he has been mutilated. But, I guess that is all he knows and it just feels "natural" and "right" to him. He's probably not aware at all of what he's missing. Sad really.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:06 pm (UTC)Did the hospital also push formula at you? They do that, I'm told. My foster sister... she couldn't stay in the hospital with Seth when he was born, she had to go back to the group home, so he was bottle fed. She pumped for him, and they gave him formula anyway. She later found out that they're not supposed to give formula without consent, but they did.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:sigh
Date: 2005-02-10 10:10 pm (UTC)and forumla is terrible. alot of my friends breast feed because their babies get sick less, are better behaved and probably will have a better likelihood of growing old without cancer than we did growing up as our parents were told by the hospitals that formula is much healthier than breast milk, etc etc etc. grrr. refined sugars and chemicals are pretty evil for the most part.
Re: sigh
Date: 2005-02-10 10:16 pm (UTC)Re: sigh
From:Re: sigh
Date: 2005-02-10 10:56 pm (UTC)Breast is best but formula isn't like feeding your kid liquid twinkies.
Re: sigh
From:Re: sigh
From:Re: sigh
From:no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:17 pm (UTC)One has a tight foreskin so he may need circumcision when he's older but generally we've had no probs.
honestly
Date: 2005-02-10 10:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:40 pm (UTC)I don't necessarily agree with it, but in the US a parent pretty much own's their child, which is why circumcision is no exception.
I don't think you can compare FGM to Circumcision because with FGM most of the time sex and even normal bathroom functions are impossible or can cause severe, permanent damage. Or in cases where the clitoris is removed the girl will most likely never have an orgasm. I do agree that circumcision is rather barbaric and should be decided by the individual, but I do not think it is the same thing as FGM because the penis is fully functioning afterwards. Of course there are cases of botched circumcisions, but I'm talking about the 99.9% that go without a hitch, whereas it's almost the opposite with the FGM.
To clarify, I think a circumcised penis "looks better", but that's probably because it's the only kind I've had experience with and what I've grown up seeing (on tv, in health classes and stuff, obviously I didn't just wander around looking at dicks). However I do think it is a cruel thing to do and think that it should be left up to the individual, like you said, if they want to get it removed on their own later in life that's perfectly fine with me.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:45 pm (UTC)2. It's exactly the same as FGM, the only difference is in degree. And the fact that it's usually done in much more sanitary conditions.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 12:45 am (UTC)I've always pretty much said, if I have a boy, I'll tell him when he's old enough, he can wash it or cut it - his choice. Because the only real problems come if you have poor hygiene. I figure, most boys given the choice will wash it. I may word it more nicely. :)
As to breastfeeding, it's certainly better. I do wish people would mind their own business though. Some people cannot breastfeed. Two of my nieces and one nephew could not be breastfed because their mother had to be on medications that they wanted to, as much as possible, keep out of the children's systems. But I wouldn't want people harassing her for it or forcing her to explain. People shouldn't have to publicly justify these things to any stranger who feels like they know what's best. Of course I'll breastfeed if I can, but it's not always possible.
On a side note, I was breastfed. I know am a bundle of weird and horrible health problems. Alas, there is more to health than the first two years.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 03:08 am (UTC)Now, this is a woman who breastfed her previous three children, and whose whole family was breastfed. Anyone giving her a hard time would be a really obnoxious git.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 01:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 01:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 05:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 09:57 pm (UTC)However, the hospital really pushed it. Everywhere you went, they asked if you were doing it. My youngest was in NICU for 2 weeks, and once he was a bit stronger, they kept calling me telling me 'you forgot to sign the release for his circumcision'. I didn't forget a THING.
Finally I got a nurse who CRIED when I told her we weren't doing it. She said as a NICU nurse it really broke her heart -- starting with babies very small, very sick, then as soon as they are healthy enough to go home, they hold them down and cut off their foreskins. It's bad enough with normal kids, but imagine your kid fought for his life, was in agony for so long, and was alone in NICU for so long, and when that hell is almost over, you do more damage? Crazy.
With my second, too, the midwife asked, 'have you thought about circumcision' (we knew he was a boy) and when we told her that we did, and we weren't doing it, she said, 'oh, good, you won't need this, then' and put down the pile of anti-circ literature she had.
It's cosmetic surgery for babies, and that's nuts.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:06 pm (UTC)I'm against circumcision for many, many reasons. Ridiculously enough, my boyfriend is all for it (this is assuming we eventually have children). I'm not exactly sure how to put my foot down on that one, except for stating the fact that if they want it done as adults, they can make that choice, but if I take something away from them, they can't get it back.
It's not that I value my belief over his. It's just that following his wish would be irreversible.
Actually, I can't fathom the fact that he would want to mutilate someone the way he has been mutilated. But, I guess that is all he knows and it just feels "natural" and "right" to him. He's probably not aware at all of what he's missing. Sad really.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:06 pm (UTC)Did the hospital also push formula at you? They do that, I'm told. My foster sister... she couldn't stay in the hospital with Seth when he was born, she had to go back to the group home, so he was bottle fed. She pumped for him, and they gave him formula anyway. She later found out that they're not supposed to give formula without consent, but they did.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:sigh
Date: 2005-02-10 10:10 pm (UTC)and forumla is terrible. alot of my friends breast feed because their babies get sick less, are better behaved and probably will have a better likelihood of growing old without cancer than we did growing up as our parents were told by the hospitals that formula is much healthier than breast milk, etc etc etc. grrr. refined sugars and chemicals are pretty evil for the most part.
Re: sigh
Date: 2005-02-10 10:16 pm (UTC)Re: sigh
From:Re: sigh
From:Re: sigh
From:Re: sigh
From:Re: sigh
From:no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:17 pm (UTC)One has a tight foreskin so he may need circumcision when he's older but generally we've had no probs.
honestly
Date: 2005-02-10 10:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:40 pm (UTC)I don't necessarily agree with it, but in the US a parent pretty much own's their child, which is why circumcision is no exception.
I don't think you can compare FGM to Circumcision because with FGM most of the time sex and even normal bathroom functions are impossible or can cause severe, permanent damage. Or in cases where the clitoris is removed the girl will most likely never have an orgasm. I do agree that circumcision is rather barbaric and should be decided by the individual, but I do not think it is the same thing as FGM because the penis is fully functioning afterwards. Of course there are cases of botched circumcisions, but I'm talking about the 99.9% that go without a hitch, whereas it's almost the opposite with the FGM.
To clarify, I think a circumcised penis "looks better", but that's probably because it's the only kind I've had experience with and what I've grown up seeing (on tv, in health classes and stuff, obviously I didn't just wander around looking at dicks). However I do think it is a cruel thing to do and think that it should be left up to the individual, like you said, if they want to get it removed on their own later in life that's perfectly fine with me.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 10:45 pm (UTC)2. It's exactly the same as FGM, the only difference is in degree. And the fact that it's usually done in much more sanitary conditions.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 12:45 am (UTC)I've always pretty much said, if I have a boy, I'll tell him when he's old enough, he can wash it or cut it - his choice. Because the only real problems come if you have poor hygiene. I figure, most boys given the choice will wash it. I may word it more nicely. :)
As to breastfeeding, it's certainly better. I do wish people would mind their own business though. Some people cannot breastfeed. Two of my nieces and one nephew could not be breastfed because their mother had to be on medications that they wanted to, as much as possible, keep out of the children's systems. But I wouldn't want people harassing her for it or forcing her to explain. People shouldn't have to publicly justify these things to any stranger who feels like they know what's best. Of course I'll breastfeed if I can, but it's not always possible.
On a side note, I was breastfed. I know am a bundle of weird and horrible health problems. Alas, there is more to health than the first two years.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 03:08 am (UTC)Now, this is a woman who breastfed her previous three children, and whose whole family was breastfed. Anyone giving her a hard time would be a really obnoxious git.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 01:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 01:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 05:04 am (UTC)