If your partner was circumcised, would you have your son circumcised too?

[Nikoletta]

I noticed from another thread that a few women whose partners are circumcised seemed to talk very positively about it for various reasons, either because they believed it was cleaner, or they liked the way it looked, etc.
If your partner is not circumcised, I can well understand it if you would never dream of circumcising your son, as it is not really the norm in this country anyway. But if you do have / have had a circumcised partner, and you like the fact that he is circumcised, what would you feel about having your son circumcised too?
Would it be important for son to match his father?
Would it be inconsistent for you to like the fact that the father is circumcised, but not get son circumcised?
Especially if you have familiarity with circumcision in the family, I would be interested to know your thoughts.
What would you do?

"I think it would be kinder for the third son not to feel different from the rest of the family."

Debster, you honestly think it would be "kinder" to cut off a piece of a newborn's body than to have a penis that didn't match his brothers. DH has a birthmark on his face, I have blue eyes when the rest of the family has brown, DD2 has blonde hair when the rest of us are very dark, DD1 is like a gazel whilst her sister is shorter and more solid like me. What do you suppose I do about those things?

And you are kidding yourself if you think there will be no pain - can you imagine urinating if someone took a knife to your labia or clitoris.

Words honestly fail me.

My ex was circumcised. Yes, it was a little more aesthetically pleasing but it's not important.

My second DS was circumcised last year due to medical reasons. It's a horrible thing to have to go through, he's had five operations on his penis and urinary tract now and the circumcision was definitely the most painful of all of them. Why anyone would choose to do that to their child is beyond me.

My DS3 will have to have it done at some point too and knowing that is very upsetting.

I would not violate a child no. Because it is violation.

What I think is interesting about the circumcision issue, (and I guess the OP's opening message hints at this), is that if you strip out all those who think that circumcision is abhorrent (just bear with me here), and strip out all those who are automatically pro-circumcision, you are left with a core of people, many of whom are pleased to have a circumcised partner, (-it's clear that there are lots of women who have this preference-), but can't quite bring themselves to impose their preferred state on their own sons.

Those that vehemently oppose circumcision would no doubt be happy about this, while those that are pro circumcision probably don't care what other people do because they just have very personal reasons to circumcise. But it is interesting how this middle section of attitudes can be swayed one way or the other over time.

Imagine what went on in the US during the 1930s-1950s, during which there was a massive shift across a large population, from only the minority circumcising, to (within the space of one generation) almost everyone (like 90%) circumcising. Whatever your personal stance on circumcision is right now, imagine being among a population swinging from one extreme to the other within such a short time. Would you hold your ground? or would you go with the flow? I think a LOT of people still belong that ambivalent middle section. In this country, they don't tend to circumcise their children because it's not the norm to do so, but because many women do slightly prefer circumcised partners, they probably would circumcise their children if everyone else did it, and it was readily on offer in maternity wards.

Conversely, that same ambivalent middle will become less inclined to circumcise if the popular mood is swinging in that direction, as happened in Australia in the past 30 years, or has been happening in the US over the past 10 years or so.

No I wouldn't get my sons circumcised.

When DS1 had a hernia operation privately aged 2, the only other two kids in surgery were there for circumcisions. The screaming that came from those kids when they came up from theatre was horrible, even if I hadn't been anti it beforehand it would have turned me against it.

I just couldn't understand why you'd voluntarily put your child through that.

Screaming is not the only reaction to circumcision. It is possible for children, especially babies, (like mine), to tolerate it very well, thanks to anaesthetic and cuddles.
Many babies scream when they get their injections. Sure, it's not pleasant, but we do it nonetheless if we believe it is beneficial for them in the long run.

What always interests me on these threads is how very difficult people find it to understand this issue from a faith viewpoint. They talk about religion as though it's an 'excuse' or not a good enough reason. Well, of course it's not a good enough reason if you don't believe in God. But if you do, and you believe that a fundamental part of your deal with God is that your sons should be circumcised, and this is how you give your son the gift of a relationship with God and membership of your faith community, then actually having a small bit of skin removed seems like rather a small price to pay. Even if it is still a big deal, you do it because that is your deal with God, and 'ooh no it may hurt' is simply neither here nor there.

it's the same with abortion. I'm always staggered at how people berate pro-lifers with questions like, 'Well, what about cases of rape, or child abuse, or young teenagers?'. Surely, if you believe that abortion is murder, all these hard cases don't justify murdering a baby. I have far less patience with people who say they're anti abortion, except in cases of rape, or when contraception has failed, or whatever.

I am, incidentally, fervently pro-choice and I think people without a religious imperative absolutely shouldn't circumcise their sons. But talking about it as though Jewish people are all somehow child-abusing sadists who are using religion as an 'excuse' is bizarre and unpleasant. And yes, it makes me come over all Jewish solidarity so that is where I'm sticking my tent.

I have two brothers. One was circumcised very early on as a baby for medical reasons, there was no way my other brother of a very similar age would have been done!

I don't know if I've possibly misread something but I was interested to see the comparison being made earlier in the thread to female circumcision given its rise in the UK.

Personally, encouraging either type is not something I would agree with and think I'd you encourage one, you can't discourage another.

For most people, male and female circumcision are worlds apart. However, if you happen to disapprove of both, then it's convenient to lump them together, saying they are as bad as each other. But if you are honest with yourself, you will agree that one female circumcision is far worse than male circumcision.

Yes I know they are ultimately different in terms of the physical body. However, it doesn't mean that anyone should make that choice for anyone else. Obviously, one form is much more acceptable and encouraged than the other.

I personally don't believe in anyone making the choice to remove a part of someone else's body and believe that both make and female circumcision, unless deemed medically necessary, should be legal.

OK, OrangeLily, fair enough that you have that view. Perhaps your own views towards the idea of circumcision come from a more objective position in the first place.

In my case, I cannot help but be influenced by my upbringing in a family where all the males were circumcised. From my very earliest years, my earliest memories in fact, taking baths with my twin brother, I just grew up thinking that a penis looks a certain way, (i.e. with the helmety always exposed). For me, it was a bit of a shock (and if I'm honest, a negative one at that) to discover that boys are born with skin covering the end, and that many boys, (most in this country at any rate) never have that taken off.

However one rationalises it, it is difficult to shake off deeply entrenched thoughts of what a 'normal' penis is supposed to look like, especially when those norms were established in one's earliest childhood.

Devora

But talking about it as though Jewish people are all somehow child-abusing sadists who are using religion as an 'excuse' is bizarre and unpleasant. And yes, it makes me come over all Jewish solidarity so that is where I'm sticking my tent.

Agree with you totally.

yes i would circumcise my sons.

OP i think a lot of people who would, wont bother to post because of the reaction it gets, so dont take this poll to be indicative of real life.

fairy injections hurt my son a lot more then circumcision, he didnt feel it at the time or after.

orange are you talking about fgm or hoodectomy?

DH is circumcised and so are both our sons. DH basically left it up to me so it wasn't a "my sons must look like I do" situation. I did my research and drew on past experiences (all my partners have been circumcised). We live in Canada though, so my frame of reference is different; it's the norm here (we're not religious) and DH and previous partners have expressed 100% satisfaction over their bits. It's so quick, easy and hygienic (performed in-surgery by GP or Paediatrician) and bares absolutely NO similarities to those awful shock-tactic FaceTube videos.

This was my experience, too. Having stayed with both my boys while they were actually being circumcised, I'm really puzzled at the way people make circumcision out to be a traumatic experience. It was over and done with so quickly, and with little fuss. And within a week, all was pretty much healed.

Those that say it doesn't hurt - have you read about the cases of adult men who suffer from PTSD because of their circumcision as babies?

Its a disgusting, unnecessary surgery. It is not performed on the NHS, and I know there are several types of medical insurance in other countries that do not cover it - because it is carries huge risks, and there are no benefits.

Frankly its abuse. You can hide behind the medical or religious facade all you like, but someone removing part of a childs body... How the hell can you justify that? To yourself? To him?

Not. Your. Body.

Didn't feel it or was in too much shock to cry about it??

'It doesn't hurt anyway' - very easy to say when it's not you having it done.

It should be illegal. It is barbaric.

Well I would not want to follow any god that wanted me to cut off bits of my newborn baby leaving him in horrible pain for days/weeks. Why on earth would any loving god want that?

And I also don't understand why you would cut bits off your newborn baby to make his penis look more aesthetically pleasing, or because you thought when he was older he might feel left out if the majority of other boys had had it done.

I have no idea why it is still legal to do this to innocent trusting babies in this day and age. Surely it could be done later as the child's own choice - although this would probably lead to it dying out as what right minded adult would choose to lop a bit of themselves off...

bears

No
My DH is circumcised for medical reasons and both he and I would only consider it if it were the only option for DS.

There you go again, you see. Jewish people are abusers who hide behind a religious facade. It is a facade, therefore Jewish people are child abusers.

Can't you find a way of expressing your opposition that doesn't promote hate against a minority cultural group? It's not hard, you know. I am a fervent supporter of equal civil marriage, but I don't think all opponents are bigots (though of course some are). I can accept that some good and decent people hold religious views that God created marriage for the union of one man and one woman. I don't think their religious views should trump my right to have full equal rights, but I don't have to drum up hate against them.

Similarly, you can respect that Jewish people see circumcision as an act of love, not of barbarism, without impugning their humanity, morality or intelligence. You might even consider how a civilised modern society could move towards resolving this debate without marginalising faith groups or encouraging anti-semitism. You might.

Didn't feel it?????? How the hell could it hurt less to have a tiny needle put in your leg than to have a piece cut off a very sensitive part of you??????

When I rule the world all adults who want their children circumcised will have to have a piece of their ear sliced off without anaesthesia first. After all, they don't serve any purpose either do they?

Oh FGS, circumcision doesn't leave babies in pain for weeks.

Have you ever watched it being done? I have.

I will stick my head above the parapet and say, as a Jew, that I do believe people who have their son mutilated are failing to protect their own child from harm, and using religion as an excuse is weak and pathetic.

I have never heard of god smiting down any man for having a penis that looked the way god indeed designed it to look. If a religious community would cast a family or child aside for not being complicit in this mutilation, then that shows a complete fanaticism and lack of compassion that I would want no part of anyway.