Circumcision but no Circumcision Party

[thefruitwhisperer]

DP is turkish but he and his family were all born in the UK and dont practise Muslim traditions apart from Eid. My DP is the only one who does Ramadan and thats only every couple of years when he can be bothered. They celebrate xmas and easter etc.

Ive agreed to have our month old baby circumcised as thats what DP wants and I agree that there are plus points, but Im an atheist so I would like all religious connotations taken out of the situation. I think thats a fair compromise (esp as its going to be quite hard for me, Im really scared) and I would like it to be a quiet decision between DP and I. His family will know the baby has been cut, why do we need to celebrate it in a party that is more for the sake of getting presents than it is anything else. I dont want the gifts.

DP has admitted that the only reason his family circumcise their babies is for social reasons, everyone has it done, everyone has a party, everyone gets money as gifts. Ive compromised on the actual circumcism, and I really really dont want to have a party. I will feel as though Ive sold my babies foreskin. Add to that, if theres no religious reason for it, why are we even doing it - and the only answer I can see is cultural/social/peer pressure reasons. I just dont see any reason to celebrate this pointless operation (obviously only pointless in this instance, I can understand where it is necessary medically or in religious circumstances) other than to show off that we have conformed and then get some money. Children who have their appendixes out dont have parties. I mean, I could equally argue that we have the baby christened catholic, my family all are and dont go to church.

AIBU to have the operation but draw the line at a party? I think DPs family are all going to be disappointed with me. And his grandparents apparently disowned his uncle for the same thing.

a baby who more than likely hasn't consented to having it's intimate parts bandied around the web

more than likely? Try not at all, because it isn't able to consent. ..which is the level of consent it also 'gives' for having it's penis mutilated.

I for one had NO idea that they need to separate the foreskin first (not a lot of experience of baby boys & their anatomy), or that they had to attach large metal instruments to cut the foreskin. For some reason I thought they just pulled it over, and chopped it off. But it is an intricate, time consuming (if done correctly) operation that is often done with no anaesthesia. With the baby screaming. With the baby writhing in pain. Strapped down.

That is why people posted the links. To show the reality. If people can't handle that reality, they have no right condoning this procedure, never mind consenting to it being done to their child. I posted my links because people also believe it is entirely without risk or complication. It isn't. And I think people deserve to know that!

Also, can we forget the cleanliness argument, because it is a red herring. My dh has a foreskin. He is immaculately clean!

it is not a red herring re the cleanliness. i guess your dh is the sort of man who probably showers in the morning and the evening, my point is that he doesn't get a chance to not be clean. not all men are like that, my point is that a penis with a foreskin unless you clean very regularly does unintentionally allow, shall i call it smegman for arguments sake, to collect. i must add that my dh does have a foreshin and so shall it remain!! but i have had a fair few partners over the years of various faiths and lifestyles (from the types who take a pride in their appearance to the type who do not, let's say leaning more towards the 'crusty' :), personally, i prefer the latter, i find them to be more manly. there are far too many small minded closed off types who like to frequent the pages of mumsnet. having spent some time on mumsnet due to boredom and varying other reasons over the christmas period and one thing that i have noticed that stands out like a beacon are the amount of posters who desperately try and outdo each other showing off both their wide knowledge of educational knowledge/vocabularly. i find this really frustrating, i am not an academic achiever, my vocabularly stinks due to lack of interest at school but i have a good life and have done well for myself. too many competative females trying to outdo each other with knowledge and put me downs. contrary to one poster correcting me and saying i had not answered a previous post requesting what a moyel and bris was. in my own way i had, terribly sorry if my knowledge and spelling was not correct or an informative as yours, i wasn't trying to be clever, i am not clever, probably one of the few only bloody posters on mumsnet who isn't bloody clever and knows everything

Using a possible minor cleanliness issue as justification for the ritualised slicing off of part of a boy's genitalia is a red herring. The risk/reward is hopelessly skewed.

if you look more closely, i am not trying to justify having the snip, i have clearly stated more than once that i am not for having it done, the cleanliness comment was just added, i can't remember why or by whom? possibly myself, certainly the snip should not be done for this reason

Once again.. it is the owner of the penis that allows it to be kept clean, not the foreskin.

Circumcised men CAN have a dirty penis too.

Laziness makes it dirty, it will be dirty whether there is a foreskin or not.

I am far from clever, Believe me! But I research things that I am passionate about. I am not trying to out do anyone, I know what I know because I read about it & retained that information, because the subject interests me.

I have posted about it from that POV. I am not trying to out do anyone, I am trying (maybe not successfully) to educate people on this.

For example, people have said that no one regrets their parents doing this to them, so I feel the need to point out this

It is about education, not out doing each other.

my point with the cleanliness and foreskins is simple, if you stand two men next to each other for two days, neither being allowed to wash, my guess is that the penis without the foreskin will be cleaner as it has space to breathe! that is all

really funny, my dh just came in and saw over my shoulder what i have been typing, he thinks i am mad although he said i was right!! (he has a foreskin and is a reasonably clean chap!!)

"snorbs, how is that different to having a young childs ears pierced?"

Babies don't generally die from having their ears pierced. A baby dies in the USA every 3 days from circumcision.

Kelway, that's probably because it was a proper Jewish circumcision and not the full amputation that is commonly practiced in the USA (not sure about here, my OH didn't have a full amputation but UK circumcision is not something I know much about).

I would say that both would be a tad minging, tbh. Not just the uncircumcised one. Lack of foreskin isn't a replacement for good hygiene!

The foreskin protects the penis from the elements. Over time a circumscised penis can develop Keratinization of glans, which is when it becomes thicker and more leathery.

I know which I'd prefer!

Foreskin is self cleaning, just like the female genitals. Do you scrub yourself with soap twice a day?

'full amputation in the US'???????are you serious, what does that mean?? what else can then take off other than a foreskin? do they leave anything??

A proper Jewish circumcision takes off what can be pulled up above the penis. I have relatives who are Jews and that is how they had theirs done, it's how it would have been done before Kellogg's became involved, it's how the paintings of baby Jesus show his (to a lot of people it looks like he hasn't been done) and certainly how Abraham would have done it. Jews during the Olympics, which were done "gymnasium" (naked) used to pull their foreskin up as much as they could to hide the scar, this would not be possible for the majority of males in the US.

In the USA the forcibly tear the foreskin from the glans (which is akin to pulling your nail from your nail bed) put a metal object over the glans, pull the foreskin up as high as possible and remove it leaving nothing. Some doctors leave more foreskin than others but it is thought that the more that is taken the better (but then they sell foreskins for use in face cream so they will want as much as possible).

There's also the plastibell method which is also an amputation more than a proper circumcision.

Just want to state I'm not justifying religious circumcision, just explaining the difference between the two.

foreskins.....face cream......blimey, i didn't know this, which face cream?

I don't believe it's happening in the UK as there are not enough babies done to make it worthwhile.

www.associatedcontent.com/article/146761/human_foreskins_are_big_business_for.html

Just Google foreskins used in cosmetics, it's common knowledge in the US so it's easy to find.

Differentname- you have clearly not read my posts but if it's ok with you I'll clarify. I spoke about scaremongering re future sex life not about the practises. As I said, from experience and discussion I don't know any c/c men who have had issues due to their c/c and have no desire to replace their foreskins. I stated this to reassure in some way mothers who have had children c/c for medical reasons and may feel a bit shit about this after reading this thread.

Re my quote "more than likely" not given consent to gave their c/c, my irony was clearly missed. Of course I know that no baby can give their right to have these videos posted online. So because the baby did not also consent for it to happen, does it make it ok to post their suffering for others to see to prove a point? I know that child abuse exists, I don't need to see images to prove it is wrong.

So back to my original reasons why I posted my comments. To those parents reading this whose child has had to be circumsised who may fear that their son now has a lifetime of sexual problems with their "vein bulgy threatening" penises then please be assured that this is not the case.

Ps nogreatexpectations- do you really think a big smiling face is an appropriate emoticon when making light of a comment about Nazis rounding people up? I am off to see hb's granny today, she is 90 and fell over so is in hospital. She also lost every member of her immediate family in the concentration camps. I'll maybe not mention the smiley face.

I don't buy the argument that it does not hurt. Even a paper cut bloody hurts - what about mothers offer to have some flesh sliced off their labia or earlobe, at the same time, (with a little bit of topical ointment obviously ) to show that anyone who thinks it might hurt their baby is being silly?

The arguments re: cleanliness are outdated, and the arguments re: disease prevention are red herrings, as the stats up-thread have shown.

My son's foreskin was fused and too tight, and I was advised by the GP to manually loosen it in the bath every day to try to stretch it myself. It was fiddly nerve-wracking, painstaking (and ultimately pointless) work on a three year old so God only knows what going at a newborn baby with a scalpel must be like. One false move and he's ruined for life. Did you see the bottom photos on the link from LeonieDelt. All those nerve endings to slice through.

Under anaesthetic, with all the time in the world and a non-wriggling non-frightened patient, and for medical need only, on a bigger willy than a newborn's, so you can see the woods for the trees as it were, is the only way to go.

Also, before my son was circumcised aged 10, a consultant tried a procedure whereby he put lots of local anaesthetic cream on, made my DS wait about half an hour for it to work, then poked a sharp implement like a crochet hook between his foreskin and glans to loosen it, without actually cutting it. The poor child nearly shot through the roof with pain, and he will never again believe a doctor when they say 'this won't hurt too much'.

By the way, when debating whether DS should be circumcised, I had read that it is a good idea for the son to have a penis like his father's.

They get to satisfy their social norms. What's in it for the boy?

I'd be interested to know what % of circumcisions go wrong (complications, infection, etc...).

It seems pretty indefensible for them to take risks with his health for their own self-satisfaction.

I wish the govt would make it illegal for circumcision to take place for children (adults can have it done if they like, but they should go private to do it) other than for medical reasons . I do not give a stuff whether a party is held or not, the whole thing is wrong to begin with .